sophos_update_adaptive_attack_protection

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the auto-expiry behavior but omits other traits like idempotency, permissions, or consequences, which are important for a mutation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two concise sentences, front-loading the core purpose and adding a critical behavioral detail without any fluff.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers the main function and the auto-expiry feature, but does not address return values or parameter combinations beyond the mentioned interplay. Overall, mostly complete for moderate complexity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema already describes all parameters, but the description adds value by explaining the interplay between enabled and expires_after ('When enabled with an expiry duration, AAP automatically disables after that period').

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Enable or disable Adaptive Attack Protection (AAP) on an endpoint', specifying the exact verb and resource, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like sophos_get_adaptive_attack_protection.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explains when to use the tool (to enable/disable AAP) but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives, such as checking current state with the get tool or other protection controls.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.