zms_list_resources

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the 'Read-only' line repeats that, but the description adds valuable context: one row per workload, key returned fields, supported filter dimensions, and the ZSCALER_CUSTOMER_ID authentication requirement. Pagination and rate-limit behavior are not disclosed, but this is reasonably transparent for a list tool.

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 short and front-loaded. Every sentence serves a distinct purpose: operation, return shape, filter dimensions, and auth requirement. There is no unnecessary prose or repetition of schema-visible defaults.

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?

Without an output schema, describing returned fields is important and done well. The description does not explicitly mention pagination, sorting, or include_deleted, but those parameters are fairly self-explanatory, and the result shape plus auth are covered. For a moderate-complexity read-only list tool, this is sufficient guidance.

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 description coverage is only 9%, so the description must compensate. It maps friendly filter names like 'type', 'provider', 'region', and 'OS' to schema concepts (resource_type, cloud_provider, cloud_region, platform_os), which is helpful. However, it omits query, page_num, page_size, sort_order, and include_deleted; the query parameter is thoroughly described in the schema itself, but the others are only self-evident from their names.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'List ZMS resources (workloads).' The parenthetical and the enumerated return fields (id, name, type, status, cloud provider/region, OS, IPs) make the target object unambiguous, distinguishing it from sibling tools like zms_list_agent_groups or zms_list_resource_groups.

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 read-only nature and filterable fields imply its usage: list workloads when you need resource inventory. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over sibling list tools or when not to use it, so the guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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