zia_get_atp_malware_policy

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

The description states the tool is read-only, matching the annotation. It adds specific return field behaviors and the update mechanism context. While annotations already cover the safety profile, the description enriches understanding without contradiction.

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 and well-structured: it starts with the purpose, then details return values, usage guidance, and features. Every sentence serves a purpose without unnecessary verbosity.

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 and the presence of annotations, the description is complete: it explains the return values (no output schema needed), usage context with the update tool, and JMESPath filtering. No gaps remain.

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 parameters are already documented. The description mentions the JMESPath filtering capability but does not add new meaning beyond the schema; baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 it gets the ZIA ATP Malware Protection Policy file-handling toggles and specifies it is read-only. It explicitly lists the two returned booleans (block_unscannable_files and block_password_protected_archive_files) with clear explanations, distinguishing it from its update sibling.

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?

Explicit guidance to always call this before zia_update_atp_malware_policy for merging partial updates (PUT-replace) is provided. This clarifies when to use the tool and how it relates to its sibling, and also mentions JMESPath filtering for client-side processing.

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