zpa_get_isolation_policy_rule

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's 'read-only' adds no new behavioral information. It does not discuss return format, pagination, rate limits, or any side effects. With annotations present, the bar is lower, but the description contributes nothing beyond the 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 a single clear sentence that front-loads the primary purpose. It is efficient, though the 'read-only' parenthetical is redundant with the annotation.

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 annotations, the description covers the basic operation but omits guidance on optional microtenant_id and return value expectations. Given low complexity, it is minimally adequate.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the two parameters. While rule_id is self-evident, microtenant_id is an optional parameter whose purpose is not elaborated. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' and names the resource 'ZPA isolation policy rule', clearly distinguishing from sibling list tools like zpa_list_isolation_policy_rules. The parenthetical 'read-only' reinforces the operation type.

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 when/when-not guidance is provided. The intended use is implied by the name and the existence of sibling 'list' tools, but the description doesn't mention alternatives or prerequisites like the need for a microtenant context.

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