generate_sbom

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It only mentions a dependency on the trivy CLI and does not state whether the operation is read-only, modifies state, or has side effects. This is a significant gap.

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 concise and well-structured. It leads with the primary action, then provides use cases, a conditional usage note, and a prerequisite, all in three sentences with no wasteful wording.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, usage scenarios, and prerequisites. Since an output schema exists, it appropriately omits return-value details. It could mention that the tool may pull the image or run a network operation, but for a simple SBOM generator the provided context is sufficient.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description compensates well by providing concrete examples for 'image' ('nginx:latest' or 'my-app:v1') and enumerating allowed values for 'format' ('cyclonedx' (default) or 'spdx-json'). This gives agents enough context to fill in both parameters correctly.

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 main action ('Generates a Software Bill of Materials (SBOM) for a Docker image using Trivy') and the specific resource. It does not explicitly name an alternative sibling tool, so it falls short of a 5, but the purpose is unmistakable.

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?

The description gives concrete use cases ('supply-chain compliance, license audits') and a condition for when to use the SBOM ('tracking exposure when a new CVE is disclosed (search the SBOM instead of re-scanning)'). It also states a prerequisite ('Requires the trivy CLI installed and on PATH'). However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like scan_image.

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