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

Annotations already establish that this is a safe read-only operation with no destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: newest-first ordering, cursor pagination, and status/date fields returned.

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 tight sentences front-load the core listing behavior and then immediately differentiate the sibling tool. There is no filler or 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?

With annotations covering safety, a full input schema, and an output schema, the description supplies exactly the missing context: pagination behavior, ordering, and the sibling alternative. Nothing needed to call the tool correctly is absent.

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%, so the input schema already documents siteId, limit, and cursor in detail. The description reinforces cursor pagination but does not add parameter syntax or meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource: listing every Scan a Site has run, with ordering and returned fields. It also distinguishes this tool from get_scan_status, which is a quick single-or-latest-five view.

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?

It explains the pagination model for walking the full history and explicitly routes quick lookups to get_scan_status. The when-to-use-this-vs-alternative guidance is clear and direct.

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