picus_search_threats

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

Discloses pagination via limit/offset, array serialization (comma-separated), and response structure including pages object and framework mappings. No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. Lacks auth or rate limit info but sufficiently transparent for expected use.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, followed by concise enumeration of filters and pagination details. Efficient use of words, but could be slightly more structured with bullet points.

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?

Covers purpose, all optional filters, pagination behavior, and response content. For a search tool with 14 optional params and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context for correct invocation.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description enumerates all 14 parameters, their types (e.g., severities: Low/Medium/High), and optionality. Adds meaning beyond schema property names, though not exhaustive for all parameter values.

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?

Clearly states 'Search the Picus Threat Library with rich filters', specifying verb and resource. However, no explicit differentiation from sibling tools like picus_get_threat, but the name and description imply a broader search capability.

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?

Lists all filters as optional but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., picus_get_threat for a single threat). Usage context is implied but not explicitly stated.

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