policy_get_destination_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states a read operation (get) but omits details like authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens if the ID does not exist. The minimal description leaves significant gaps in transparency.

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 a single concise sentence: 'Get a single Destination List by id.' It is front-loaded and contains no superfluous words, earning its place efficiently.

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?

For a simple one-parameter get tool with no output schema, the description is mostly complete: it clarifies the action and resource, and the schema documents the parameter. However, it could briefly mention the return value (e.g., 'returns the destination list details') to be fully self-contained.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'list_id' described as an 'Opaque resource identifier returned by Cisco Secure Access.' The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what is already in the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get a single Destination List by id.' uses a specific verb (get) and resource (Destination List), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like policy_list_destination_lists (list all) and policy_create/delete/update (mutations).

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 implies use for retrieving one list by ID but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., policy_list_destination_lists to find IDs, or policy_get_application_list for applications). No when-to-use or when-not-to-use context is given.

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