dcsync

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention that this is a read-only query, what the output format looks like, or any potential performance or permission considerations. The phrase 'requête vérifiée' adds limited credibility but no behavioral detail.

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 with no redundant wording. It efficiently conveys the core purpose, but it omits essential context, making it under-specified rather than appropriately concise.

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 that there is no output schema, no annotations, and the tool is a specialized query among many siblings, the description is too thin. It does not explain the return format, parameter usage, or when to choose this over similar tools, leaving significant gaps in the agent's ability to invoke it 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?

The input schema has two parameters (k and cy) but provides no descriptions, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not compensate by explaining these parameters or how they influence the query. The agent would have no way to know what k and cy should contain beyond the default values.

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 that it identifies principals that can DCSync a domain, with the specific permissions GetChanges + GetChangesAll. This clearly indicates the tool's function and differentiates it from sibling tools that target other AD attack paths, though it lacks an explicit verb and directly names no sibling alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'run_cypher', 'domain_admins', or other predefined queries. The description does not state appropriate scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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