zcell_list_anomaly_policy_violations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this with 'Read-only.' It adds useful behavioral context by stating that it returns 'policy rows carrying violation data over a `days` lookback window,' clarifying the output granularity beyond the annotation alone.

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 three short sentences with the purpose front-loaded. It contains no filler and each sentence earns its place: purpose, behavior, and sibling guidance.

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, low parameter coverage, and five parameters, the description is not complete enough. It explains the high-level purpose and points to the sibling tool, but it omits what `policy_id` refers to, how pagination works, and what the returned 'policy rows' actually contain.

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 description coverage is only 20%, and the description does not compensate. It mentions `days` as a lookback window, but provides no meaning for the required `policy_id` or for `page`/`size`. The `query` parameter has a detailed schema description, but the description itself adds little parameter-level understanding.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List the ICCIDs that violated a Zscaler Cellular anomaly policy.' It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling zcell_list_iccid_violations, which is described as drilling into per-event detail for a specific ICCID.

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 explicitly says 'Use zcell_list_iccid_violations to drill into the per-event detail for a specific ICCID,' providing a clear alternative. It also frames the tool as read-only and scoped to a days lookback window, which tells the agent when this listing tool is appropriate.

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