zpa_list_lss_status_codes

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true; description adds that it returns code-to-metadata mapping including log types, which is consistent and adds context. No contradictions or missing behavioral traits.

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose and return format, second gives usage context. No redundant information, front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Given that an output schema exists, the description adequately covers the return structure and usage context. It is complete for a straightforward read-only list tool, though it could mention that it is safe or non-destructive (already implied by annotations).

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 has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. Description does not add extra meaning to parameters beyond the schema; the log_type parameter is implied but not explicitly described, and service is not mentioned.

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?

Clearly states it lists ZPA LSS session status codes with their metadata and applicable log types, distinguishing it from related sibling tools like zpa_list_lss_client_types or zpa_list_lss_log_types.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: when authoring a status-code filter or interpreting a streamed event. Does not include when-not-to-use or alternatives, but provides clear context.

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