zdx_get_device_deep_trace

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

The annotation 'readOnlyHint: true' already indicates a read-only operation. The description repeats this with '(read-only)' but adds no further behavioral details (e.g., no info on rate limits, authentication, or side effects). Given the annotations cover the main safety trait, the description adds minimal additional value, resulting in a satisfactory but not excellent score.

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 a single, concise sentence that includes the verb, resource, retrieval method, and a note on read-only nature. It is front-loaded with essential information and contains no extraneous words. Every word contributes to clarity, making it an exemplary model of conciseness.

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 simple get-by-ID tool with an output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers the basic function and resource identification. However, it could be improved by briefly mentioning that the trace ID must be obtained from a list operation (e.g., 'zdx_list_device_deep_traces'), as this would help the agent understand the workflow. Nonetheless, the presence of the output schema and full parameter descriptions mitigate the need for extensive context.

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?

All three parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description bears little responsibility for parameter semantics. The description adds 'by ID' which refers to trace_id, but this is already clear from the schema. Since schema coverage is high, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate; the description does not enhance parameter understanding 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and resource 'specific ZDX deep trace by ID', which precisely defines the tool's function. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'zdx_list_device_deep_traces' (which returns multiple traces) by specifying retrieval of a single trace by ID, and adds the read-only qualifier for extra clarity.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'zdx_list_device_deep_traces' or other get-deeptrace tools. While it implies use when a trace ID is known, it lacks guidance on prerequisites or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the name and parameters.

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