ai_code_scanner__scan_file

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it mostly does not. It never states that the operation is read-only/non-mutating, what the scan returns, whether findings are cached, or any auth/rate constraints. Only the detection domain is disclosed.

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?

A single tight sentence with the action first and no filler; appropriately sized for a one-parameter tool. It sacrifices a little useful context for brevity, which keeps it just short of 5.

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 a low-complexity tool (one required param, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is minimally adequate: it tells the agent what is scanned but not what comes back (findings shape) or that it is a safe read. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 100% and the sole 'path' parameter is already documented as 'Absolute or relative path to the file to scan'. The description adds no syntax, format, or constraint detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb ('Scan') plus a precise resource ('a single file') and a clear detection domain ('insecure AI/LLM integration patterns'). The word 'single' implicitly distinguishes it from the scan_directory sibling, though it never names scan_text or scan_directory explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied by the singular 'a single file' – an agent can infer this is for one file rather than a directory or free text, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-to-prefer-an-alternative statement, and no prerequisites given.

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