vulnerability__get_system_cves

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

Annotations already declare `readOnlyHint: true`, so the tool is known to be read-only. The description adds no new behavioral traits (e.g., no mention of pagination details, performance, or side effects) but does not contradict annotations.

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 concise with 6 sentences, but includes some redundancy (e.g., 'This is a report...' restates the first sentence) and a mention to refer to the OpenAPI spec, which is of limited value. Still, it is front-loaded with the key guidance.

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?

Given the existence of an output schema, the description covers the tool's purpose, usage, and distinguishing guidance. No critical gaps are present for a read-only list endpoint with well-documented parameters.

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% with all parameters described in the input schema. The description does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 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 states 'Get list of CVEs affecting a given system', which clearly identifies the verb and resource. It differentiates from siblings by noting that `get_cves` is preferred for filtered results, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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 'IMPORTANT: Prefer `get_cves` as `get_cves` can filter for CVEs with available advisories.' This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, naming an alternative tool.

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