get_security_evidenceReturns the latest public web-security scan results for turva.dev's own domain (Hardenize, Internet.nl), with the scan date. Use this when a user asks about turva.dev's own security posture or wants evidence beyond agent-readiness scores. Read-only: returns static JSON and changes nothing.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds that the data is 'public' and 'static JSON,' providing useful context about no auth requirements and cached data. It restates 'changes nothing,' consistent with annotations, but doesn't contradict them.
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 three short sentences, each with a distinct purpose: function, usage guidance, and safety note. It is front-loaded with the key verb and resource, and contains no redundant wording.
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?
The tool is simple—no parameters, no output schema, and read-only behavior. The description covers return value (scan results, scan date), usage context, and safety. No gaps remain for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.
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 zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain. The description does not attempt to describe parameters because none exist. Baseline for 0 params is 4.
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 returns web-security scan results for turva.dev's own domain, names the sources (Hardenize, Internet.nl), and mentions the scan date. It distinguishes from siblings by referencing 'agent-readiness scores' as a different context.
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 explicitly says 'Use this when a user asks about turva.dev's own security posture or wants evidence beyond agent-readiness scores,' giving clear situational guidance. This implies the tool is not for agent-readiness queries, differentiating it from sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool returns a distinct category of information: readiness score, principles, security evidence, and services. Even though readiness and security evidence both relate to verification, their descriptions clearly separate agent-readiness scanning from web-security scanning.
All tools follow a consistent get_<noun> pattern with clear, descriptive nouns: readiness, principles, security_evidence, services. No mixed conventions or vague verbs.
Four tools is on the lower end but appropriate for a read-only informational server about a single company. Each tool has its own scope and none feel redundant.
The server covers the main self-disclosure surface: readiness, security evidence, principles, and service catalog. A contact or get_started tool might be a minor addition, but the core informational purpose is satisfied.