shodan-http-headers

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the read-only nature ('Show'), the auth requirement, and the return type (HttpHeadersResult). It does not mention rate limits or failure modes, but for a simple introspection endpoint this is acceptable.

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 brief and front-loaded, with each sentence contributing useful information. The 'Returns:' block is clear and avoids redundancy.

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's low complexity (one optional parameter, simple output) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential context: purpose, auth, use case, and return format. No significant gaps remain.

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 single parameter (timeout) has a complete schema description covering semantics, so the description adds no additional value. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema coverage is 100%.

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 shows HTTP headers sent by the client, using a specific verb ('Show') and resource. The first sentence unambiguously distinguishes this from sibling tools like IP lookup or search.

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 gives clear context ('Useful for debugging') and a key prerequisite ('Requires a Shodan API key'). It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the tool's niche is self-evident given the sibling list, so this is a minor gap.

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