get_zia_user_departments

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

The description restates the read-only nature already declared by annotations and adds the behavioral detail of list vs single fetch. However, it does not disclose pagination, sorting, or other behaviors that are present in the schema but not described.

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 immediately conveys the purpose and primary use cases. No extraneous information; every word is meaningful.

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?

Given the complexity (9 parameters, no output schema), the description is far too brief. It omits information about return values, pagination behavior, mandatory vs optional parameters, and any prerequisites, leaving the agent with significant uncertainty.

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 only 11% schema description coverage and 9 parameters, the description should compensate significantly. It only hints at 'filters' and 'by ID', which correspond to search and department_id, but offers no details on format or usage for the other parameters.

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 verb 'Read', the resource 'ZIA user departments', and distinguishes two distinct use cases: listing with filters or fetching a single department by ID. This is specific and differentiates from sibling tools that operate on other resources.

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 two usage modes (list vs fetch by ID) but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any conditions or exclusions. The guidance is implicit, not explicit.

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