Retrieves the current status and summary of a GuardBee scan using its scan ID, so you can track scan progress and results.
Get the current status and summary of a GuardBee scan by ID
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| scanId | Yes | Scan ID returned by start_scan |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.5Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read operation but says nothing about what statuses exist, whether a scan may still be running, how often to poll, or what happens with an unknown/expired scan ID.
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?
One front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and identifier are stated up front. It is efficient, though perhaps too terse given the missing behavioral detail.
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?
There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description is the only place to explain the returned status/summary shape — yet it stops at naming them. For a polling tool an agent needs to know what the status values mean and when to call again.
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 single parameter is documented as 'Scan ID returned by start_scan'. The description adds only 'by ID', which is redundant with the schema, so baseline 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+resource: 'Get the current status and summary of a GuardBee scan by ID'. It is distinguishable from siblings like vulnerability_scanner__start_scan and vulnerability_scanner__get_findings by naming status/summary as the payload, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with those siblings.
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: the schema note 'Scan ID returned by start_scan' hints that this is a follow-up to starting a scan, but the description itself states no when-to-use condition, no guidance on polling, and no pointer to get_findings for detailed results.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.