discover_network

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

The description mentions 'scan' which implies active network probing, but does not explicitly disclose potential network impact, permission requirements, or rate limits. With no annotations, more detail would improve transparency.

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 concise with two sentences and a markdown header. It is front-loaded and avoids unnecessary detail, though the header adds minimal overhead.

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 the simple input (single CIDR param) and the presence of an output schema, the description sufficiently explains the tool's basic function. However, it could mention what types of medical systems are identified or how comprehensive the port scan is.

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% as the single parameter 'cidr' has a description in the schema. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond that, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 that the tool scans network devices and medical systems, identifying open ports and system types. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'identify_medical_systems', which overlaps in functionality.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'start_scan', 'scan_host_ports', or 'identify_medical_systems'. The description only states what it does.

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