abnormal_remediation_manage

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

Discloses that 'remediate' removes messages and 'unremediate' restores, but does not mention authentication, rate limits, or side effects. No annotations provided, so description partially fulfills the burden.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main verb and resource, no redundant words.

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?

Covers action semantics well but lacks information about return values, especially for the 'status' action, and does not mention prerequisites like already having a threatId from another tool.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the description adds value by explaining the meaning of each action enum ('remediate' removes, 'unremediate' restores, 'status' checks), going beyond the schema definitions.

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 it triggers or checks the status of a remediation action for a specific threat message, distinguishing it from sibling tools that list or get threats/cases.

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 usage when remediation or status checking is needed, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives.

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