List recent GuardBee scans in your workspace, filter by status or brand ID, and page through results to track scan progress.
List recent GuardBee scans in your workspace
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number (default: 1) | |
| status | No | Filter by scan status | |
| brandId | No | Filter by brand ID | |
| pageSize | No | Results per page (default: 20, max: 50) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It hints at scoping ('recent', 'in your workspace') but says nothing about read-only nature, pagination behavior, default ordering, or rate limits for a tool that exposes page/pageSize.
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 scope front-loaded and zero filler. It is arguably under-specified rather than padded, but structurally it is clean.
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?
Four optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations leave real gaps: the description does not cover pagination semantics across pages, ordering of 'recent', or what a scan record contains. For a list tool with this much unsupervised surface, more context is needed.
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 description coverage is 100%, so page, status, brandId, and pageSize are already documented in the schema, including the enum and defaults. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond that, 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?
Names a specific verb (List) and resource (GuardBee scans) plus scope (recent, in your workspace), which distinguishes it from siblings like start_scan, get_scan_status, and get_findings. It stops short of explicitly saying what it is not, so it falls short of a 5.
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?
No guidance on when to call this versus the sibling read tools vulnerability_scanner__get_scan_status or get_findings, nor any stated prerequisites. The listing intent is inferable from 'List', but nothing routes the agent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.