proofpoint_quarantine_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavior disclosure. It mentions the fields searched but does not reveal pagination behavior, return format, or any other behavioral characteristics. For a search tool, it is minimally transparent but lacks depth.

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 that directly states what the tool does without any fluff or redundancy. It earns 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 search tool with a fully described schema, the description is adequate. It clearly defines the search scope and aligns with the required parameters. However, no output schema exists, so a note about return data (e.g., quarantined message list) would improve completeness, but it is not strictly necessary.

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%, so the parameters are already well documented. The description adds value by naming the specific fields (sender, recipient, subject) that the query searches, but does not clarify additional parameters like startDate/endDate or pagination. Baseline 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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('quarantine') with clear scoping across sender, recipient, and subject fields. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like proofpoint_quarantine_list, release, and delete, which have different actions.

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 when to use this tool (searching quarantined items by keyword), but it does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives like proofpoint_quarantine_list, nor does it provide exclusions or conditions. Usage context is present but not fully stated.

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