scan_output_dlp

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only states the core function (scan and redact) but omits details like side effects, permissions, whether findings are stored, or what happens to the original text. This is insufficient for an agent to anticipate behavior fully.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently communicates the core purpose.

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 lack of output schema and the tool's complexity (scanning with parameters), the description is too brief. It does not explain return format, error handling, or behavior when sensitive data is found, leaving significant gaps for an agent to use 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 already provides descriptions for 3 of 4 parameters (75% coverage), including useful context for 'text'. The tool description itself adds no additional parameter meaning. The missing description for 'secret_terms' is not compensated by the tool description, so it meets the baseline but does not excel.

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 scans model output for sensitive data and returns redacted text, which is a specific verb+resource+outcome. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling scanning tools like scan_language_input or scan_code_symbols, which could confuse an agent about when to use each.

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 implies usage (before external delivery, as per the text parameter description) but provides no explicit guidance on when to or not to use this tool, nor alternatives among the many sibling tools. The context is only implied.

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