kali_information_gathering

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'gather information' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether it's read-only, requires specific permissions, has rate limits, or what the output format looks like. The description is too vague to inform the agent adequately.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and includes examples that add clarity without verbosity.

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 the complexity of information gathering tools and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what information is returned, how results are structured, or any operational constraints, leaving significant gaps for the 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters ('target' and 'tool'). The description adds minimal value by implying the tool is used for information gathering, but doesn't provide additional syntax, format details, or constraints beyond what the schema provides.

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 action ('gather information') and the target ('about target'), with examples of specific tools (whois, dns, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings like 'kali_network_scan' or 'kali_web_scan' by focusing on information gathering rather than scanning or exploitation, but doesn't explicitly contrast them.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'kali_enumeration_tools' or 'kali_network_scan'. The description implies usage for initial reconnaissance but lacks explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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