zia_get_atp_malware_protocols

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true, so the agent knows it's a safe read. The description adds that it retrieves toggles for HTTP/FTP, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits like rate limits or scope. The description does not contradict annotations.

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 of 7 words, front-loaded with the key verb and resource. Every word earns its place; no redundancy or fluff.

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 has no parameters, an output schema is absent, and the tool is read-only, the description is minimally complete. It lacks detail on the return value format (e.g., boolean toggles or a list). More context would help, but the simplicity of the tool reduces the burden.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%. Therefore, the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter information because there are none to describe.

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 'Get' and the resource 'ZIA malware protocol toggles', specifying the protocols (HTTP/FTP). It distinguishes from siblings like zia_get_malware_settings by focusing on protocol toggles. However, the term 'toggles' could be more explicit (e.g., current status).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among many siblings (e.g., zia_get_malware_settings, zia_get_atp_malware_policy), the description does not clarify when to use this specific tool. There is no mention of prerequisite context or when not to use it.

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