zcell_list_region_operational_status

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, and the description reinforces that. It adds transparency by detailing that the response includes 'broker-cluster (BC) and app-connector (AC) status blocks and the MAP A-C / B-C link statuses', providing context beyond the annotation.

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 short sentences: first states purpose, second adds read-only status and output details. No fluff, front-loaded, every sentence earns its place.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description provides a reasonable overview of what's returned (regions, status blocks, link statuses). It could be improved by explaining the structure of these blocks, but it's largely sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's output.

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 has 2 parameters with 50% description coverage (only 'query' described). The description does not mention or elaborate on either parameter, missing the opportunity to clarify 'bc_size' or add usage notes for 'query'. Thus, it adds no value beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'list', the resource 'Zscaler Cellular configured regions', and the specific focus on 'operational status'. This differentiates it from sibling tools like 'zcell_list_regions' which likely only list region names.

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 includes 'Read-only' as a usage condition, implying it's safe to call. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., zcell_list_regions) or when not to use it.

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