megalinter_get_security_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states 'get comprehensive information' but does not disclose whether the data is static or dynamic, if authentication is required, or the structure of the output. For a zero-parameter tool, the behavioral implications are minimal but still could be more explicit.

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 a single sentence of 15 words with no redundancy. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and organizational structure.

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?

Given no output schema, the description could better define what 'comprehensive information' entails (e.g., lint names, rules, severity). However, for a zero-parameter retrieval tool, it is minimally adequate but lacks full specificity.

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?

There are zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by listing the categories of linters, but no parameter documentation is needed beyond the schema.

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 tool retrieves comprehensive information about security-focused linters, organized by specific categories (SAST, secrets, supply-chain, container, infrastructure). This differentiates it from sibling tools like megalinter_get_linters which covers all linters.

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 implies usage when security linter info is needed but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like megalinter_get_security_recommendations or megalinter_get_linters. No exclusion or prerequisite guidance is provided.

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