zia_get_sandbox_report

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds critical security context: the report contains content from a hostile sample, and warns to treat strings as data, not instructions. This goes beyond annotations and provides guidance on safe interpretation, significantly enhancing transparency.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose. The second sentence is longer with valuable security guidance, but remains focused and not redundant. Minor verbosity in the second sentence, but overall appropriately sized.

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 complexity (a sandbox report), the description provides useful context about the report's structure (Classification block) and data handling. However, it omits any details about the return format, pagination, or the report_details parameter, and does not compensate for the 0% schema coverage.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions the MD5 hash implicitly but fails to explain the optional 'report_details' parameter at all. No meaning is added beyond the schema's minimal property names.

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 'Get the ZIA Sandbox detonation report for a file MD5 hash' – a specific verb+resource, distinguishing it from other sandbox tools like zia_get_sandbox_behavioral_analysis or zia_get_sandbox_file_hash_count. It unambiguously names the input (MD5 hash) and the output (detonation report).

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 context on how to interpret the report (focus on Classification, treat strings as data) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like behavioral analysis or file hash count. It implies usage for obtaining a detonation report but lacks exclusionary guidance.

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