zdx_list_deeptrace_top_processes

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true; the description adds 'Read-only' and explains that the tool returns process groups captured during the session, which adds behavioral context beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose. No wasted words. Efficient and clear.

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?

With no output schema, the description does not explain what 'top processes' means (e.g., sorting criteria) or the return structure. Required parameters lack explanation. While annotations cover read-only, the description is incomplete for a full understanding.

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 33% (only 'query' has description). The tool description does not add meaning for the required parameters 'device_id' and 'trace_id', nor does it explain how they are used. For low coverage, description should compensate, but it does not.

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 'list' and the resource 'top processes captured during a ZDX deep trace', specifying scope (during a trace) and format (full records). This distinguishes it from sibling tools which are mostly ZIA/ZPA/ZCC/ZMS related.

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?

Explicitly states 'Read-only' and provides a use case ('useful for spotting resource-intensive processes impacting performance'), giving context on when to use. However, no explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives are mentioned, though siblings are not directly comparable.

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