zcell_list_audit_customers_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds valuable context: it returns curated rows, omits before/after blobs, and mentions optional filters. No contradiction with annotations.

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 four lines, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds necessary detail without redundancy. Highly efficient.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description partially explains returned data (curated rows with who, what, when, operation). However, it is missing details on pagination, error behavior, and full parameter descriptions for a 10-parameter tool. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 10% (one parameter documented). The description mentions operation/object/visibility filters but does not explain days, page, size, object_id, object_name, object_type, modified_by_user_id. It adds partial value but is insufficient for the gap.

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 searches Zscaler Cellular audit-log entries over a lookback window, specifies it is read-only, and lists the key data returned (who, what, when, operation). It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on audit customers.

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 usage for audit log queries but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool vs alternatives or provide exclusions. Sibling tools are many, but no comparative guidance is given.

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