zms_get_agent_connection_status_statistics

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

The description repeats the readOnlyHint annotation ('Read-only') and adds that it returns aggregated counts/percentages. Since annotations already mark it as read-only, the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond confirming the return format. No contradictions.

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 extremely concise: three short sentences that front-load the core purpose, then add read-only nature and requirements. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words.

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?

While the description covers the main purpose, output type, and a requirement, it fails to document the search parameter. For a simple statistics tool, this omission reduces completeness. No output schema exists, so the description should cover all inputs.

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 only parameter (search) has schema coverage of 0%, and the description provides no explanation of its purpose or usage. The agent cannot infer what 'search' does from the description alone, making this a significant gap.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('ZMS agent connection-status statistics'), and provides specific details on the output (connected vs disconnected counts/percentages for fleet health). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like zms_get_agent_version_statistics by focusing on connection 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?

The description indicates the tool is read-only and requires ZSCALER_CUSTOMER_ID, providing clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives or exclude specific scenarios, though the purpose is clear enough for selection.

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