zdx_list_alert_affected_devices

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

The description adds JMESPath client-side filtering beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It correctly identifies the tool as read-only, matching the annotation. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as default response format, pagination behavior, or performance implications of filtering.

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 extremely concise at two sentences, front-loading the core purpose and key feature (JMESPath filtering). No extraneous words; every sentence adds value.

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 output schema exists, the description need not explain return values. However, it omits mention of pagination parameters (offset/limit) and default time window (since). For a list tool with 10 parameters, the description is slightly thin but adequate with the schema providing remaining 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description only mentions the query parameter (JMESPath) but does not add meaning beyond the schema descriptions for other parameters like alert_id, location_id, offset, etc. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'List devices affected by a ZDX alert' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It also clarifies read-only nature and JMESPath support. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like zdx_list_devices (list all devices) or zdx_get_device (single device detail).

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 this tool is for listing devices affected by a specific alert (requires alert_id), but lacks explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like zdx_list_devices or zdx_list_historical_alerts. No exclusions or alternative mentions are provided.

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