shodan_host

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must handle behavioral disclosure. It mentions requiring an API key but not how to provide it (e.g., environment variable). It also does not discuss rate limits, error handling, or any side effects. For a read operation, this is a moderate gap.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and output types. No redundant information.

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?

The tool has one parameter and no output schema. The description covers the key output fields. While it could mention response format or error conditions, it is largely sufficient for an API lookup tool.

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 one parameter with 100% description coverage ('IP address to look up'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond restating the purpose, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool fetches Shodan host details for an IP, listing specific data types (open ports, services, banners, vulns, OS, ASN, geolocation). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like shodan_dns_resolve or shodan_search.

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 includes the prerequisite 'Requires SHODAN_API_KEY,' but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the clear listing of output fields implies its use case for host reconnaissance.

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