Full scan

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=false, so the mutation/non-idempotent nature is covered structurally. However, the description omits critical behavior: this likely kicks off a long-running asynchronous job (evidenced by siblings like instance_scan_progress and progress) requiring polling, and it says nothing about cost, duration, or side effects on the instance.

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 opening sentence is front-loaded and clear, but the remaining two lines are Sphinx ':return:'/':rtype:' boilerplate that convey nothing an agent can act on. Half the text is auto-generated noise.

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?

For a zero-param, no-output-schema mutation that likely triggers an expensive async instance-wide scan, the description is thin. It does not explain what a full scan inspects, how to track progress, or what the returned Response contains beyond a vague 'information about the full scan'.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the schema has nothing to document and the description cannot add parameter meaning. Per the baseline for zero-param tools, this scores high by default.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Initiate a full instance scan.' The word 'full' implicitly distinguishes it from point_scan, suite_scan, and combo_suite_scan siblings, but it never names them or clarifies the scope difference, so an agent must infer the distinction.

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 versus point_scan, suite_scan, or combo_suite_scan, and no mention of prerequisites or follow-up steps. The agent gets no signal about which scan variant to pick.

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