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

readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile, so the description's added value is the return shape (scan_id, site, status, date) and the 'newest first' ordering. It stops short of saying whether results are truncated, capped, or paginated — the key behavioral unknown for a 'recent' list.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with scope, with the field list and ordering appended. No filler.

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 no output schema, describing the returned fields and sort order is exactly the right compensation, and the zero-param schema needs no explanation. The remaining gap is the undefined 'recent' window and whether a limit applies.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The parenthetical field list usefully previews the return shape in the absence of an output schema, though it describes outputs rather than parameters.

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?

Names the resource (scans), its scope ('Your' = current user), the fields returned, and the ordering ('newest first'). An agent can distinguish it from the singular get_scan sibling, though the description never names that sibling explicitly.

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 statement of when to use this versus get_scan or get_actions, and no prerequisites. The only guidance is implicit in 'recent', which is never defined (how recent, how many results).

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