proofpoint_dlp_list_encrypted

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 that the output includes encrypted message status and recipient access, but does not mention safety, pagination behavior, date-range filtering implications, or any prerequisites. The absence of any side-effect documentation or read-only indication leaves a transparency gap.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and contains no unnecessary words. It effectively conveys the core function and output highlights without bloat.

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 core purpose and output are adequately described, but the lack of an output schema and annotations means more context would be helpful. It does not explain how filters interact, default date ranges, or how encrypted messages relate to DLP incidents. However, for a simple listing tool, it provides sufficient baseline context.

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 covers all 6 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, but it does not need to because the schema is sufficient.

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 the tool lists messages encrypted by Proofpoint Email Encryption, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like proofpoint_dlp_list_incidents by focusing on encrypted messages rather than incidents.

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 intended use case (listing encrypted messages) is implied but no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. There is no mention of when to prefer this tool over other listing tools like proofpoint_dlp_list_incidents or quarantine list tools.

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