pci_get_scan

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint. The description adds a limitation: active_hosts is aggregate and no per-host breakdown is reported. This is valuable behavioral context not captured by 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 (two short sentences plus argument spec). It front-loads the purpose and every sentence adds value, including the limitation note.

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 an output schema available, the description adequately covers the single parameter and a key data limitation. The tool is simple (one param, no nested objects) and the description is complete for an agent to select and 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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description fully compensates by explaining scan_id as The scan's scan_id from pci_list_scans, providing provenance and meaning beyond the integer type.

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 'Detail for one scan', clearly specifying a verb (get) and resource (scan). It distinguishes from siblings like pci_list_scans by focusing on a single scan's detail and explicitly references the aggregate active_hosts count.

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 implies usage context by instructing scan_id from pci_list_scans, indicating this is a follow-up tool. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the sibling names and the 'one scan' phrasing provide clear context.

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