zeasm_get_finding_scan_output

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral details beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: it notes that content can be large free-form text, is preserved verbatim, and explicitly names the return fields (content and source_type). This provides practical context beyond the annotation.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence immediately states the purpose, and subsequent sentences add essential return-value and size caveats without any redundant or filler text.

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 two-parameter getter, the description covers purpose, read-only nature, and return fields. It lacks explicit error-case details, but given the simplicity and presence of readOnlyHint, the description is adequately complete.

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%, and the description does not explain the purpose or format of org_id and finding_id. While the parameter names are self-explanatory, the description does not compensate for the lack of schema-level details, so the agent must infer semantics from the tool name alone.

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 retrieves the complete scan output for one EASM finding, distinguishing it from sibling tools like zeasm_get_finding_details or zeasm_get_finding_evidence by specifying the exact resource and scope.

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 the tool is used when the complete scan output is needed, but it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternative finding-related tools, nor does it provide exclusions or alternatives.

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