find_allshortestpaths_with_shadow_credential_permission

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'find' but doesn't specify if this is a read-only operation, what data it returns, any permissions required, rate limits, or side effects. The description is too brief to convey any meaningful behavioral information beyond the basic action implied by 'find'.

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, poorly structured sentence that repeats the tool name without adding value. While concise, it's under-specified rather than efficiently informative, failing to use its brevity to clarify purpose or usage.

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?

Given the complexity implied by the tool name (involving paths, permissions, and principals), no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't compensate for the lack of structured data, leaving the tool's functionality, behavior, and parameters unclear.

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 has 1 parameter with 0% description coverage, and the tool description provides no information about the 'domain' parameter. It doesn't explain what the domain represents, its format, or how it influences the search for paths with Shadow Credential permission, leaving the parameter entirely undocumented.

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 'Find allshortestpaths with Shadow Credential permission to principal(s)' restates the tool name with minor grammatical adjustments, making it essentially tautological. It doesn't clarify what 'allshortestpaths' means in this context or what 'Shadow Credential permission' entails, leaving the purpose vague despite the tool name being descriptive.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the many sibling tools related to paths, permissions, and principals (e.g., 'find_allshortestpaths_with_dcsync_to_domain', 'route_*' tools), the description fails to differentiate this tool's specific use case, offering no context or exclusions.

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