zms_get_nonce

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

The annotation already declares readOnlyHint=true, and the description repeats 'Read-only' (no contradiction). The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by warning that the payload may carry sensitive enrollment data and by stating the operational requirement ZSCALER_CUSTOMER_ID. This goes beyond what annotations alone provide, though it does not describe output structure or error behavior.

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 very concise: three short sentences each conveying needed information (purpose, read-only, key, sensitive data, required auth). There is no fluff or repetition of schema/annotation details.

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 get-by-ID tool with an output schema present and annotations already supplied, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, parameter meaning, read-only nature, required prerequisite, and data sensitivity. It is arguably complete enough for an agent to decide when and how to invoke, though it could have explicitly referenced the sibling list operation as a contrast for full 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?

The input schema provides only the parameter name 'eyez_id' with a string type and no description. The description clarifies 'Keyed by eyez_id', which tells the agent that this parameter is the lookup key, but it does not explain what an eyez_id is, its format, or how to obtain it. Given zero schema description coverage, the description partially compensates but leaves a gap in parameter understanding.

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 'Get one ZMS nonce' uses a specific verb and resource, and the word 'one' clearly distinguishes it from the sibling list operation zms_list_nonces. It is immediately obvious that this tool fetches a single nonce by ID rather than listing all.

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 clear usage context: it is keyed by eyez_id and requires ZSCALER_CUSTOMER_ID, which implies the user must have a specific identifier and customer context. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over zms_list_nonces or what the alternative is, so exclusions are missing.

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