scan_image

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

The description discloses that Trivy must be installed and that the first scan downloads the vulnerability database, which is a side effect. However, it does not state whether the scan is read-only, whether images may be pulled, what output format is returned, or how failures are reported. With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral transparency.

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 well-organized with a short introductory paragraph, a note about defaults, and an Args list. It is slightly redundant because the default severity is mentioned both in prose and in the Args section, but the text remains efficient and readable.

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 prerequisites, side effects, and parameter semantics, which is helpful. However, it does not describe the expected return value or output schema, and it lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus related scanning tools. For a moderately simple tool this is acceptable but not fully complete.

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?

Both parameters are clearly explained in the description despite the schema having no descriptions. The image parameter includes examples, and severity explains the comma-separated format and default value, fully compensating for the missing schema descriptions.

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 that the tool scans a Docker image for known vulnerabilities using Trivy. It identifies the specific resource (Docker image) and action (scan), making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 provides prerequisites and notes the first-run database download, but it does not mention when to prefer this tool over sibling tools such as scan_dockerfile or generate_sbom. No explicit alternative guidance or exclusions are given.

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