wazuh_query_vulnerabilities

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

No annotations provided, and description lacks behavioral details like read-only nature, pagination (though params hint), error handling, or required permissions. Does not disclose 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?

Two concise sentences. Front-loaded with primary action. No unnecessary words. Could be structured with more detail on usage.

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 6 parameters, output schema present, and no annotations, description covers basic purpose but lacks behavioral and usage context. Adequate but incomplete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline 3. Description only reiterates filter options already in schema; no additional semantic context or parameter usage examples.

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?

Clearly states it queries vulnerability-detector inventory for CVEs with filters. Includes specific filter examples (severity, agent, CVE ID). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tool wazuh_vulnerability_heatmap.

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 on when to use this tool over siblings, prerequisites (e.g., agent existence), or scenarios. Only implicit context that it's for querying vulnerabilities.

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