zia_get_atp_settings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description's 'Get' is consistent. The description adds scope ('tenant-wide') and object type ('policy block'), but no extra behavioral details such as error cases (e.g., resource not found) or rate limits. With annotations covering safety, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It effectively communicates the tool's purpose in minimal space.

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 read-only getter with no output schema, the description provides the essential information but leaves the exact structure of 'ATP policy block' undefined. Given the absence of an output schema, a bit more clarity on what the block contains would improve completeness, though it's not strictly necessary for a simple fetch.

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 zero parameters, and the calibration indicates a baseline of 4 for no-parameter tools. The description correctly focuses on the resource rather than parameters, so no additional meaning is needed.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'ZIA tenant-wide ATP policy block', clearly stating its function. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like zia_get_atp_malware_policy, missing the opportunity to differentiate within the large set of ZIA tools.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the many similarly named ATP-related tools in the sibling list, explicit mention of when this tool is appropriate (e.g., 'use this for the tenant-wide policy, not per-policy settings') would be beneficial.

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