sqlmap_scan

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

With no annotations, the description partially discloses behavior: it explains execution timing, how on_timeout works, and that 'continue_background' returns a durable job_id. However, it does not mention that the tool will perform a network scan, its potential destructiveness, or prerequisite permissions.

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 relatively short (4 sentences) and front-loads the tool name. It could drop the redundant 'Kali Agent MCP tool: ' prefix, but overall it is efficiently structured and wastes few 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's complexity (8 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It lacks the tool's core purpose, return value description, prerequisites, and how results are interpreted. The output schema exists but is not referenced.

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 0%, so the description must add meaning. It explains the intent behind expected_runtime_seconds, timeout_seconds, check_after_seconds, poll_interval_seconds, and on_timeout. However, it fails to describe the required 'url' parameter or other options like 'data' and 'additional_args', which are critical for a scanning tool.

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 states 'Kali Agent MCP tool: sqlmap_scan' but does not clarify that the tool runs sqlmap for SQL injection detection. It focuses on execution timing parameters, leaving the core purpose vague. Sibling tools like nmap_scan or nikto_scan are not differentiated.

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 provides guidance on choosing timing parameters and on_timeout options, but no guidance on when to use sqlmap_scan versus other scan tools (e.g., nmap_scan, nikto_scan). It lacks context about its specific use case (SQL injection).

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