zia_get_atp_malware_inspection

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds 'traffic-direction toggles' but provides no additional behavioral details such as what the toggles entail, any side effects, or limitations. The marginal value beyond annotations is low.

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 a single sentence that is concise and front-loaded. Every word carries meaning, with no redundant or irrelevant information.

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, parameterless read tool, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks details about the return format or what the 'traffic-direction toggles' specifically are. Without an output schema, more context would be helpful.

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?

There are no parameters, so the schema coverage is effectively 100%. The description adds context by naming the resource as 'traffic-direction toggles', which gives meaning beyond the empty schema. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and this meets it.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('ZIA malware inspection'), adding context about 'traffic-direction toggles'. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like zia_get_atp_malware_policy or zia_get_atp_settings, though the name is distinct.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, conditions, or scenarios where this tool is preferred over siblings.

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