proofpoint_tap_get_messages_blocked

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It clarifies what 'blocked' means (quarantined/rejected) but fails to mention time window constraints, filtering options, or response format, leaving significant behavioral gaps.

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, directly get to the point. The first sentence states the core action and the second adds valuable clarification without redundancy.

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?

With no output schema, the description should describe returned data or provide context on tool behavior. It does not mention response structure, potential errors, or constraints like the 1-hour limit on sinceSeconds. Inadequate for a tool with 4 optional parameters.

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?

All parameters have schema descriptions, yielding a baseline of 3. The tool description adds no extra meaning about how interval, sinceTime, sinceSeconds, or threatStatus interact, so it does not exceed the baseline.

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 identifies the tool's function: retrieving messages blocked because they contained threats. It distinguishes from the sibling proofpoint_tap_get_messages_delivered by explicitly stating 'blocked' and further clarifies that these messages were quarantined or rejected before reaching the recipient.

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 the use case for blocked messages but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like delivered messages or clicks blocked. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided, leaving the agent to infer from sibling names.

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