zdx_get_application

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

The description adds 'Returns the headline ZDX score plus per-region impact breakdown' and the default time window beyond the annotations' readOnlyHint. However, it does not disclose error handling, pagination, or what happens when filters are applied. With annotations already covering safety, this is a moderate addition.

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?

Three concise, front-loaded sentences. Each sentence adds unique value: purpose, read-only and output details, and parameter sourcing. No redundant or filler content.

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?

The description adequately covers the core output (ZDX score and regional breakdown) and default window, but lacks explanation of the optional filter parameters. Since there is no output schema, the agent must infer the meaning of `geo_id`, `location_id`, and `department_id` from names, which may be insufficient for optimal use.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains `app_id` (from list) and `since` (hours window), but does not mention `geo_id`, `location_id`, or `department_id`. These optional filters are left undefined, leaving a significant gap for a 5-parameter tool.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: 'Get the ZDX score for one application, with its most-impacted regions.' It specifies the resource (one application) and output (score + region breakdown), distinguishing it from sibling tools like zdx_get_application_metric or zdx_get_application_score_trend.

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?

It provides concrete guidance by directing users to use `app_id` from `zdx_list_applications` and explaining the `since` window (default 2h). While it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools for other use cases, it gives enough context for an agent to understand when this tool is appropriate (single app score with regional impact).

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