Get a scan report

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond that: the shape of the return payload (executive summary plus per-category results) and the quota-free nature of repeated reads. It stops short of describing behavior when a scan is still running or any rate/latency characteristics.

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?

Two tight sentences with the action and payload front-loaded, followed by the usage rationale. No filler, no restatement of the title.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully sketches the return contents and the quota behavior that motivates re-reading. The one gap is what happens if the referenced scan has not finished (partial vs pending results), which matters given the 'collect a scan that run_scan left running' framing.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both scan_id and lang documented in the schema itself. The description only reinforces that lookup is 'by id' and adds nothing about the lang parameter or id constraints, so the schema carries the full burden as expected at baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Fetch the full findings for a scan by id') and enumerates what the payload contains ('executive summary and per-category results'). It also positions itself relative to run_scan, so an agent can distinguish this read-only retrieval from the scan-creating sibling without opening schemas.

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?

Gives two concrete selectors: collecting a scan that run_scan left running, and re-reading an earlier scan without spending quota. It names the relevant alternative (run_scan) and the condition that favors this tool, though it does not state explicit exclusions or point to list_scans for enumeration.

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