zdx_list_departments

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

The description explicitly states 'Read-only', which aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation. It adds value by clarifying the output format (curated id/name rows) and the time-based filtering behavior. However, it doesn't disclose potential rate limits or pagination, but given the annotations already cover the read-only nature, the description adds sufficient context beyond the annotations.

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 concise, with three short sentences that are front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value: the first states the purpose, the second clarifies read-only and usage, and the third explains the `since` parameter. No wasted words.

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, no output schema, few parameters), the description is largely complete. It covers the purpose, usage, and key parameter semantics. The only gap is the `search` parameter, which is not explained, but the schema provides no description for it either. For a list tool with annotations, this is adequate.

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?

The description adds meaning to the `since` parameter by specifying it is in hours with a default of 2h, which is not in the schema. It also explains the purpose of the `query` parameter indirectly by mentioning the curated id/name rows, but the schema already provides a detailed description for `query`. With 33% schema coverage, the description compensates for the `since` parameter but doesn't fully explain `search`, which remains undocumented. Overall, it adds value 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 tool lists ZDX departments as curated id/name rows, with a specific verb (list) and resource (departments). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by specifying the ZDX scope and the curated id/name output format, which is not evident from the name alone.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: to obtain a department_id for use as a scope filter on other ZDX tools. It also provides a key usage detail: the `since` parameter is in hours with a default of 2h. This gives clear context for when and how to use the tool, though it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, the purpose is specific enough to avoid confusion with siblings.

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