list_dfw_policies

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

Annotations provide safety cues (readOnly, idempotent). Description adds scope ('default domain'), return fields, and parameter behavior. No contradictions.

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 plus an Args section, front-loaded with purpose. Every part adds value with no redundancy.

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 readOnly annotations and presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, scope, return fields, and parameter. No missing 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?

Only parameter 'target' has no schema description but is fully explained: optional, defaults if omitted. Adds complete meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states it lists DFW security policies in the default domain, with specific fields returned. Differentiates from sibling tools like get_dfw_policy (single) and create/delete operations.

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?

Implied usage from name and description, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor mention of alternatives. The purpose is obvious given sibling context.

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