Module Information

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'Get information', implying a read operation. It does not explain what happens for invalid paths, whether the module is loaded or executed, what return data to expect, or any side effects or prerequisites.

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 filler. It is efficiently concise, though the terseness means it omits behavioral and return-value details.

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?

With no output schema, the description should clarify what 'information' means and what the agent will receive, but it doesn't. It also lacks context for how this tool differs from list-modules or search-exploit, leaving an agent uncertain about when to invoke it.

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 schema description already fully documents modulePath with a concrete example. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond 'specific Metasploit module', so with 100% schema coverage, a baseline of 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 'Get information about a specific Metasploit module' states a clear verb and resource, and the 'specific' qualifier differentiates it from sibling list-modules. However, 'information' is vague and does not define the scope of the data returned, so it doesn't fully separate it from search-exploit.

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 guidance is given about when to use this tool versus siblings. It neither names alternatives like list-modules or search-exploit, nor states that a known modulePath is required. The agent must infer usage from the parameter schema.

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