vulnerability_scan

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds context by specifying the scanning source (OSV.dev) and supported ecosystems, and implies no side effects. No contradictions with annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes usage guidance without any redundant information.

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?

For a tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key aspects: what it does, when to use it, and the ecosystems involved. It could detail output format but isn't critical.

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?

No parameters exist; schema coverage is 100%. The description correctly does not need to explain parameters, and the baseline score of 4 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 the verb 'scan', the resource 'dependencies', and specifies the target CVEs across multiple ecosystems (npm, Rust, Python, Go). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'ecosystem_pulse' or 'get_context' by focusing on security scanning.

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?

Explicitly tells when to call: 'when the user asks about security, vulnerabilities, or CVEs, or before you recommend a dependency.' This provides clear context for usage, though it does not mention when not to use.

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