gobuster_scan

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

The description adds value by explaining execution timing parameters and on_timeout behavior, but it does not disclose the underlying scanning behavior (e.g., network requests, loudness, potential impact). Without annotations, the transparency is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's operational effects.

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 dense paragraph that leads with a redundant phrase and prioritizes execution details over core purpose. It lacks clear structure and could be more concise by front-loading the tool's function.

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 9 parameters, no annotations, and an existing output schema, the description is incomplete. It omits the tool's primary function, parameter meanings, and usage context, making it insufficient for an agent to use the tool effectively.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain all parameters, but it only covers timing-related ones (expected_runtime_seconds, timeout_seconds, etc.). Core parameters like url, mode, wordlist, and additional_args are left unexplained, leaving the agent without crucial input semantics.

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 fails to state what gobuster_scan actually does. It only mentions 'Kali Agent MCP tool: gobuster_scan' and then dives into execution timing details, leaving the core purpose of directory/file brute-forcing entirely unspecified.

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 gobuster_scan versus alternative scanning tools like nmap_scan, nikto_scan, or dirb_scan. The description only discusses execution timing options, not the tool's typical use cases or scenarios.

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