List past scans

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

Annotations already mark the operation as read-only, and the description adds useful behavioral context: account scoping, reverse chronological ordering, and the practical implication that the data can be consulted before launching a new scan. No contradiction exists.

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 tightly written sentences: the first states exactly what the tool does, and the second gives concrete use cases. No filler or repetition of schema details.

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 read-only list operation, the description conveys scope, ordering, and typical usage. It does not describe the exact return fields or pagination behavior, but the schema explains filters and pagination, and 'find a scan id' implies the relevant output.

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 input schema documents all four parameters with descriptions, constraints, and an enum, so the description needs to add little. The description does not expand on parameter behavior, but schema coverage is 100%, so a baseline 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?

States a specific verb ('List'), a resource ('this account's scans'), and a behavior ('newest first'). The use cases 'find a scan id' and 'check whether a site has been scanned' clearly distinguish it from sibling tools like run_scan and get_scan_report.

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?

Clearly tells the agent when to use this tool: to locate a scan id or avoid duplicate scans before starting a new one. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings such as get_scan_report, but the intended use cases are concrete and actionable.

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