detect-services

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 using nmap's -sV probes and returns ScanResult, but does not disclose behavioral aspects like network noise, privilege requirements, or how errors are handled. The authorization warning adds some transparency.

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 four sentences, each earning its place. The purpose is stated first, followed by technical detail, an important warning, and return format. No redundancy or unnecessary 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 the tool has five parameters and an output schema, the description provides sufficient context: method, returns, and an authorization warning. It does not cover edge cases like timeouts or empty results, but overall it is complete enough 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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds context about the nmap technique but does not provide additional semantics beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 detects services and versions on open ports using nmap's -sV probes. It specifies a concrete verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like scan-ports (which likely only lists open ports) and detect-os (which focuses on operating system detection).

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 includes an authorization warning but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like quick-scan or scan-ports. It does not explain when service detection is appropriate or which scenarios favor this tool over others.

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