Search bug-bounty targets across all programs by query, tag, platform, and match mode to find relevant scopes, including ineligible or out-of-scope results when needed.
Search targets across all programs.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| q | No | ||
| page | No | ||
| tags | No | ||
| page_size | No | max 500 | |
| platforms | No | ||
| match_mode | No | ||
| include_ineligible | No | ||
| include_out_of_scope | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, yet it says nothing about pagination, matching behavior, eligibility/scope filtering, or result ordering. Only the phrase "across all programs" hints at scope; everything else an agent needs to predict behavior is absent.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler, but the brevity is under-specification rather than efficiency. There is nothing to trim, but nothing substantive is delivered either.
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?
An eight-parameter search tool with no annotations, no output schema, and near-zero schema documentation. The description supplies none of the missing context an agent needs to invoke it correctly.
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?
Eight parameters with 13% schema description coverage (only page_size has "max 500"), and the description explains none of them. The meaning of q, match_mode, include_ineligible, include_out_of_scope, tags, and platforms is left entirely to guesswork.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ("Search targets") plus a scope ("across all programs"). It is distinguishable from find_program_by_target, but the description never contrasts itself with the very similar sibling list_targets.
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?
No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, no exclusions. The phrase "across all programs" weakly implies this is the cross-program variant versus list_targets, but the agent must infer that from the sibling name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.