get_vulnerability_summary_all

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states a read operation but omits details about permissions, performance implications, aggregation behavior, or return format. The brief sentence adds minimal transparency.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no extraneous text. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, earning a 4 rather than 5.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity, the description lacks crucial context: no output schema, no parameter explanations, no behavioral notes. It is too sparse to fully address an agent's needs.

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% and the description does not mention or explain any parameters. For two parameters (env_id, agent_token), the description adds zero semantic value beyond the schema itself.

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 action ('get') and the resource ('vulnerability summary across all scanned images'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'get_vulnerability_summary' which likely scopes to a specific image. The phrase 'across all scanned images' provides precise scope.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_vulnerability_summary' or 'list_all_vulnerabilities'. No context on prerequisites or appropriate scenarios is provided.

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