scout_cves

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

The description goes beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint) by detailing the requirement for Docker login for richer recommendations, the output format (dict with format, result, raw), and that anonymous scans work for public images. No contradictions with annotations.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose, a note on prerequisites, and a bulleted parameter list. It is concise but could be slightly streamlined without losing clarity.

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 description is complete for a tool with 6 parameters and no output schema. It covers purpose, usage prerequisites, parameter details, and return format. It does not explain basic concepts like CVEs, which is reasonable.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description explains all six parameters (image, format, platform, only_fixed, ignore_base, only_severity) with their meanings and defaults, providing essential context that the schema lacks.

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 'List vulnerabilities (CVEs) in an image via Docker Scout,' specifying the verb (list) and resource (CVEs in an image). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like scout_compare or scout_quickview, which have different purposes.

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 context on when to use the tool (for listing CVEs) and includes prerequisite information about Docker login for Hub features. It does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the sibling list offers a clear set of related tools for different tasks.

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