triage_finding

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses two behavioral modes but omits side effects, permissions, or state changes (e.g., recording a VEX decision is a write operation). No contradictions.

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?

Extremely concise single sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource. Could be more structured (e.g., two bullet points) but no wasted words.

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 no annotations but presence of output schema, the description covers the tool's two modes. However, it lacks explanation of the exploitability prompt concept and does not discuss return values or prerequisites, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 descriptions for all 4 parameters. The description adds context linking disposition/justification to VEX decisions, but does not significantly enrich beyond schema details.

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 states the tool's purpose: 'Triage a finding' with two specific modes (get exploitability prompt, record VEX decision). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on triaging a single finding, unlike scanning or reporting tools.

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 when to use (triage a finding) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives among related siblings like 'ignore_vulnerability' or 'remediate_and_verify'.

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