vulnerability_attack_vectors_search_by_fields

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

The description contradicts the input schema by claiming 'from, size, q' are required, while the schema marks them as optional with null defaults. Additionally, no behavioral traits (e.g., side effects, authentication) are disclosed, and the term 'connection' is undefined.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it lacks structure and fails to front-load the most critical information. The required parameters claim is not accurate, wasting space.

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 9 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the response format, pagination (though from and size are mentioned), or the nature of 'connection'. The tool is not adequately specified for an AI agent to use correctly.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, parameter descriptions are minimal and uninformative (e.g., 'query param from (int)'). The description adds only a misleading claim of required parameters. No explanation of how parameters interact or the meaning of 'q'.

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?

Description states 'Get object by connection' which is vague and does not clarify what a vulnerability attack vector is. Among many sibling search_by_fields tools, no differentiation is provided. The HTTP method and path are given but the purpose is unclear.

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 versus alternatives. The description only lists required parameters (from, size, q) but does not explain the context or scenarios for its use.

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