get_scan_details

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that results are 'latest' and enumerates the return content, but it omits other behavioral details such as error handling, authorization requirements, or whether multiple scan runs are supported. This is adequate but not rich.

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 that states the main purpose first, then specifies the included results. Every phrase adds value and there is no filler or repetition.

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?

For a simple one-parameter get tool with an output schema, the description is largely complete. It mentions the key components of the response and the 'latest' qualifier. It does not address edge cases or prerequisites, but these are not critical given the tool's simplicity.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It says 'by ID', which implies scan_id is the unique identifier of a scan, but it does not elaborate on where to find the ID or any expected format beyond the schema's integer type. This is a minimal but functional explanation.

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 clearly identifies the tool as fetching latest results for a single scan by ID, listing specific content (hosts scanned, per-plugin findings, vulnerability counts). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_scans (which likely lists scans) and get_asset_details (which focuses on assets).

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 clearly implies use when needing detailed results for a specific scan, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternative tools (e.g., list_scans for finding IDs). It provides clear context without exclusions.

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