zia_get_atp_malware_protocols

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description reinforces read-only nature and adds behavioral details: the three booleans, JMESPath filtering, and the recommended call order. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with primary purpose. No extraneous text; every sentence adds value. Efficient and clear.

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 low complexity (boolean toggles), no output schema, and annotation coverage, the description fully explains what the tool does, what it returns, and the recommended usage pattern. Sufficient for agent invocation.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. Description adds context that 'query' enables JMESPath client-side filtering, which slightly extends schema detail. Meets baseline for high schema coverage.

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 ATP Malware Protection protocol-level inspection toggles (read-only), and specifies it returns three booleans. This distinguishes it from sibling tools, which are other ZIA get operations.

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?

Explicitly advises calling this tool before zia_update_atp_malware_protocols for partial updates, and explains the update is PUT-replace. This provides clear when-to-use context and a prerequisite.

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