batch_scan

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive. The description adds behavioral context: it runs a full security audit in parallel on up to 10 domains and returns specific output components (score, NIST grade, finding counts). This complements the annotations without contradiction.

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 three sentences long, each sentence serving a clear purpose: stating the action, describing output, and providing usage guidance. No redundant information; it is as concise as possible while being informative.

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 covers core functionality, output, and differentiation from a sibling tool. There is no output schema, so explaining the return structure (score, grade, findings) is valuable. It does not discuss error handling or edge cases, but for a batch scan tool this is acceptable.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema documents all parameters (domains, format, force_refresh). The description does not provide additional meaning or usage guidance for any parameter beyond what the schema already describes. Baseline 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 uses a specific verb 'Bulk-scan' and clearly identifies the resource (domains) and the action (scan in parallel). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'compare_domains' by noting that batch_scan is for bulk auditing while compare_domains is for side-by-side analysis.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Use when you want to audit multiple domains at once or do a bulk scan.' It also contrasts with a sibling tool (compare_domains). However, it does not explicitly exclude single-domain use or mention prerequisites.

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