zpa_get_service_edge

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

The read-only annotation is duplicated by the description, adding no new behavioral context. No additional details like rate limits, auth requirements, or response format are provided. Since annotations already cover the safety profile, the description adds minimal extra 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?

The description is a single, concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action and resource, earning its place.

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 a simple get-by-ID with a read-only annotation. The description adequately covers the main purpose, but lacks any mention of return values or additional context like microtenant behavior. Given the simplicity, this is nearly complete but not fully.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only mentions 'by ID', which clarifies service_edge_id but completely ignores microtenant_id. No format, constraints, or usage details for the parameters are given, leaving a significant gap.

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 ZPA Service Edge by ID (read-only)' clearly states the action (get), the resource (ZPA Service Edge), and scope (by ID). It distinguishes from siblings like zpa_list_service_edges (list all) and zpa_get_service_edge_group (get a group).

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 phrase 'by ID' provides clear context that this tool is for fetching a single service edge when the ID is known, contrasting with the list sibling. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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