zms_list_app_catalog

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

The description explicitly states 'Read-only,' matching the readOnlyHint annotation. It adds useful behavioral details: returns nested port/protocol/process specs and requires a customer ID. No contradictions with 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 very concise: four short sentences that front-load the main purpose and immediately give key details (read-only, output, filters, requirement). No unnecessary 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?

The description adequately explains the output structure (id, name, category, nested specs), but omits pagination behavior (even though page_num and page_size exist in the schema). For a list tool, pagination info is important for completeness. No output schema to compensate.

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 description adds context beyond the schema for filtering ('Filter by name/category') and sorting ('sort by name/category/time'), but does not explain page_num, page_size, sort_order values, or the query parameter. With only 14% schema coverage, the description should cover more parameters to be fully helpful.

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 main action ('List the ZMS application catalog'), specifies output content (id, name, category plus nested specs), and mentions its value for policy planning. It distinguishes itself from sibling list tools (e.g., zms_list_agents) by naming the resource as 'app catalog'.

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 gives usage hints: filtering by name/category, sorting by name/category/time, and a requirement (ZSCALER_CUSTOMER_ID). While it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools, the context of being a read-only catalog list is clear enough for an agent to decide when to use it.

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