Get C2 Operators

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive nature. Description adds some context about the output (cluster analysis) but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like pagination, time range, or data freshness.

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?

Single, well-front-loaded sentence that conveys the purpose without unnecessary words. Every word contributes to understanding.

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 read-only tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains what it does and what it returns. Could benefit from mentioning typical use cases or what distinguishes an operator group.

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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%. Description adds value by explaining what the tool returns, which is the main content. Baseline is 4 for zero-parameter tools.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves C2 operator cluster analysis with specific details (behavioral fingerprints, infrastructure, groups), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_c2_stats or get_c2_cross_correlations.

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?

Description implies usage for analyzing C2 operators but lacks explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives, such as get_c2_cross_correlations or get_c2_configs. No when-not or example scenarios.

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