run_sast_scan

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Execute') but lacks details on execution behavior, such as whether it's a long-running process, if it requires specific permissions, potential side effects, or what the output looks like. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that performs security scanning.

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, direct sentence with no unnecessary words, making it highly concise and front-loaded. It efficiently communicates the core action without any fluff or redundancy.

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 the complexity of security scanning and the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how results are structured, or any behavioral nuances, leaving the agent with incomplete context for effective use.

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 has 100% description coverage, providing clear details for all three parameters. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, so it meets the baseline score of 3, as the schema adequately handles parameter documentation.

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 action ('Execute') and the resource ('SAST scan'), making the purpose evident. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from its siblings like 'run_dast_scan' or 'run_sca_scan', which are also security testing tools but for different types of scans.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when SAST scanning is appropriate compared to DAST, IAST, or SCA scans, nor does it specify prerequisites or exclusions for usage.

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