scan_prompt

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

Describes the scan as pure content scan, deterministic, returning findings with risk band. Lacks details on detection methods or limitations, but adequate for a simple tool with no 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?

Description is short and front-loaded with '[READ]' to indicate nature. Minor formatting oddity (dash) does not detract. Could be slightly more structured but overall efficient.

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 simple deterministic scan with one parameter, the description fully covers purpose, usage, behavior, and parameter without needing output schema. No gaps given tool complexity.

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 description provides a brief parameter definition ('text: The text to scan'), which adds slight value beyond the schema. With 0% schema coverage, more detail would be beneficial, but the single parameter makes it acceptable.

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 tool name and description clearly indicate it scans text for secrets/PII/code/jailbreak. It specifies it's a deterministic read operation, distinguishing it from sibling tools that involve model calls.

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 states 'Use it to pre-check anything before sending it to a local model,' providing clear context. Also notes 'No Ollama call' to differentiate from generative tools.

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