zia_list_network_apps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., pagination, rate limits, or filtering behavior). It 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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It conveys the essential purpose efficiently.

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?

The description is minimal given the tool's complexity: three parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools. It does not mention filtering with the 'search' parameter, locale impact, or typical response structure. For a list tool, more context about pagination or available fields would improve completeness.

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 coverage is only 33%: only the 'query' parameter has a description in the schema. The description does not mention any parameters or add meaning beyond what the schema provides. With low coverage, the description should compensate, but it fails to do so.

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 it lists ZIA network applications, both predefined and custom. It uses a specific verb and resource, making the purpose unambiguous. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like zia_get_network_app or zia_list_network_app_groups, though the distinction is implicit.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like zia_get_network_app for a single app or zia_list_network_app_groups for groups. There is no mention of prerequisites or context.

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