github_code_scanning_get_analysis

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must convey behavioral traits. It says 'Get', implying a read-only operation, but fails to mention idempotency, authentication requirements, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a reliable tool.

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, which is concise, but it does not add value beyond the tool name. It is not structured to front-load critical information, and every word earns its place only in the most minimal sense.

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 should at least hint at the return value (e.g., a code scanning analysis object). It does not, leaving the agent unaware of what data to expect. The presence of siblings like get_sarif and get_alert adds confusion without further clarification.

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 covers 100% of parameters with basic descriptions. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline for parameter semantics.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'code scanning analysis', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_analysis, list_recent_analyses, etc. However, it does not specify the scope or context of the analysis, such as whether it includes SARIF or alert details.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_recent_analyses or get_alert. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned, making it hard for an agent to decide between similar operations.

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