scan_buckets_start

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

The description discloses async behavior (returns immediately, poll with status) and a behavioral edge case (degrades to info when unprovisioned). This adds value beyond annotations which only hint at non-readonly and non-destructive nature. No contradictions.

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 with zero waste. The purpose is front-loaded, and the async workflow is summarized efficiently. Every word earns its place.

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 the async flow and links to sibling tools, but lacks explanation of parameters and the 'unprovisioned' fallback. Given the complexity (async, multiple cloud providers) and lack of parameter docs, it is adequate but not fully complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'target domain' and 'cloud-bucket discovery' but does not explain the 'providers' parameter or constraints like maxLength. The parameter semantics are mostly missing.

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 purpose: to start an async cloud-bucket discovery scan for a target domain. It specifies the action (start), resource (scan), and scope (cloud buckets). It also distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning poll and retrieve steps.

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 usage context: operator-deploy only, degrades when unprovisioned, and directs to sibling tools for status and results. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus alternatives like scan_domain.

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