zia_list_auth_exempt_urls

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

With readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false in the annotations, the description adds no behavioral detail beyond what the annotations already provide. It does not mention response shape, pagination, list scoping, or any operational caveats, so the description contributes little beyond the structured metadata.

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 filler or redundant explanation. It is appropriately sized for a simple, one-parameter list tool.

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 list tool with a well-documented query parameter and read-only annotations, the description is minimally sufficient: it identifies the resource clearly. However, with no output schema, it leaves the return-value shape and list scoping unstated, so it is adequate but not complete.

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 fully documents the only parameter (optional JMESPath query) with examples, caveats, and a field-name warning, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description itself adds no parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('List') and names a specific resource ('the ZIA cookie-auth exempt URL list'), making the tool's function immediately clear. This is distinct from sibling list tools that target different resources, such as zia_list_url_categories or zia_list_url_filtering_rules.

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 no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no prerequisites. It relies entirely on the resource name to imply its use case, offering no practical decision support for the agent.

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