zeasm_list_findings

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint: true. The description adds the behavioral detail of JMESPath client-side filtering, which is beyond the annotations. However, it doesn't disclose other behaviors like pagination or rate limits, though the tool seems straightforward.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core purpose and read-only nature, followed by the filtering capability. No unnecessary words, and 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 presence of an output schema and the tool's simplicity (3 parameters, 1 required), the description sufficiently covers the main functionality. It lacks mention of pagination or limits, which is a minor gap for a list tool that might return many results, but overall it 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions 'supports JMESPath client-side filtering via the query parameter', which adds context but does not significantly extend beyond the parameter descriptions in the schema. The role of 'org_id' and 'service' is not elaborated 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 'List', the resource 'EASM findings', and the scope 'for an organization'. It also mentions read-only and JMESPath filtering, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like zeasm_get_finding_details that retrieve individual findings.

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 indicates the tool is for listing all findings and supports filtering, but does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., for specific findings) or provide alternatives. The context from siblings helps but is not explicit.

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