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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context, such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or output-specific caveats. It merely restates the tool's purpose without elaborating on side effects or dependencies.

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 redundant information. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description is too sparse to fully contextualize the tool within the extensive sibling set. It lacks usage context and parameter elaboration, leaving an agent without enough information to select this tool confidently over other scan-related data retrieval options.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description only repeats the parameter name ('scan_id') without explaining its format, origin, or constraints. This provides minimal added meaning beyond the schema structure, failing to compensate for the lack of parameter documentation.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Get IDS alerts for a scan_id.' It uses a specific verb (Get) and resource (IDS alerts), and the parameter is explicitly mentioned. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that handle other scan-related data, such as get_scan_result or get_malware_by_scan.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention preferred contexts, exclusions, or relationships to other tools in the sibling set. An agent would have to infer usage from the name alone, which is insufficient given the large number of similar get_* tools.

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