zcell_list_sim_analytics_map

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

The description adds context beyond annotations by specifying the returned data includes ICCIDs, IMSIs, and tags, and that it backs the fleet map. It confirms read-only behavior, which is consistent with annotations. No destructive actions or side effects are described, but the tool's safety is transparent.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, then details on return data and optional scoping. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, achieving high efficiency.

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 tool's simplicity (list operation, read-only, no output schema), the description covers the purpose, return data, and optional filtering adequately. No additional information is needed for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 50%, but the description clarifies the `icc_ids` parameter, explaining it scopes results to specific ICCIDs. The `query` parameter is well-documented in the schema. The description adds meaning for the undocumented parameter, compensating 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 explicitly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'Zscaler Cellular SIM map points (dashboard lat/lng summary)', clearly defining what the tool does. It distinguishes from sibling tools like zcell_list_sim_analytics_summary by specifying it returns map points with lat/lng coordinates.

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 retrieving SIM location points and mentions optional scoping by ICCIDs, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any exclusions. Usage context is clear but guidance is minimal.

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