zpa_get_app_protection_rule

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

The description states 'read-only', which is already declared by the readOnlyHint annotation. It adds no new behavioral context such as authentication needs, rate limits, or response details. Since annotations carry the burden, the description is redundant and provides marginal value.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every word contributes to the purpose statement. Ideal conciseness for a simple tool.

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 tool is simple with one required parameter and an output schema present. The description adequately conveys the core functionality. However, it does not mention the optional parameters for scoping (microtenant_id, service), though these are documented in the schema. Nearly complete for the context.

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 100% and all parameters are described in the schema. The description adds only 'by ID' which aligns with the 'rule_id' parameter. This provides minimal added meaning beyond the schema; baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'ZPA app protection rule', and the method 'by ID'. It also notes it's read-only, distinguishing from write tools. Among siblings like 'zpa_list_app_protection_rules', the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'zpa_list_app_protection_rules'. The description implies a single-rule retrieval use case but does not provide when-not-to-use or prerequisites. Adequate for a standard get-by-ID tool.

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