Check GitHub Security Advisories for a package across npm, Maven, pip, or NuGet ecosystems to identify known vulnerabilities.
Look up GitHub security advisories. ecosystem is npm, maven, pip, or nuget.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| package | Yes | ||
| ecosystem | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavior-disclosure burden. It implies a read operation with 'Look up' but does not mention output format, limits, error behavior, or any side effects.
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 two short sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loadedament and the ecosystem clarification 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?
A tool with two required parameters and no annotations needs more context to be called reliably. The description covers allowed ecosystems but leaves 'package' under-specified and provides no usage or behavioral context beyond the bare lookup action.
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?
The description does add value for 'ecosystem' by enumerating supported values (npm, maven, pip, nuget). However, 'package' receives no explanation, and schema coverage is 0%, so only half the parameters are meaningfully described.
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 states a clear action ('Look up') and a specific resource ('GitHub security advisories'). It is unambiguous about what the tool does, but it does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like deps_npm_audit.
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?
There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus the sibling tools. The description only lists allowed ecosystems, which gives context for inputs but not for tool selection or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.