kali_run_gobuster

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions that the tool runs a brute-forcer, but does not disclose that it actively sends network requests, may require authorization, or could generate significant traffic. This is a notable gap for a security scanning tool.

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 short, front-loaded with the main purpose, and uses a clear Args list. Every sentence adds value, specifically the defaults and examples, without unnecessary fluff.

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?

While an output schema exists and parameter details are covered, the description lacks important contextual information: when to choose gobuster over other enumeration tools, that it performs active scanning, and any authorization or caution notes. For a brute-forcing tool, these are significant omissions.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does so by providing a target URL example, a default wordlist path, and an example of the options flag format, giving meaningful guidance for all three parameters.

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 runs Gobuster, a URI/directory brute-forcer, with a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like kali_run_nmap and kali_run_sqlmap, which target different scanning tasks.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any mention of prerequisites or exclusions. The description only states what the tool does and lists arguments, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.

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