deep_scan

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the specific analysis scope, the subscription-based rate limit (2 free/day), and implies a more intensive operation than sibling scans. It does not explicitly state read-only behavior, but 'analysis' implies no state mutation. Sufficiently transparent given the absence of annotations.

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 exactly two sentences, with the first sentence front-loading the core purpose and the second providing comparative and access information. Every word earns its place, with no filler or 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?

The description covers purpose, comparative positioning, rate limits, and core analysis areas. While there is no output schema, the mention of 'risk breakdown' hints at the return type. For a tool with two parameters and clear scope, this is reasonably complete, though it could explicitly state whether the operation is read-only.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both `chain` and `contract` fully documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter-level semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 opens with 'Deep forensic analysis:' followed by a specific list of analysis dimensions (ownership, permissions, exploit pattern matching, bytecode analysis, risk breakdown). It clearly identifies the tool's function and differentiates it from siblings by stating 'Goes deeper than verify or scan.' This is a specific verb+resource+scope that distinguishes it.

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 phrase 'Goes deeper than verify or scan' explicitly positions this tool relative to sibling tools, indicating when to use it over lighter-weight alternatives. The mention of '2 free/day, unlimited for Pro/Builder subscribers' also provides clear usage context and access constraints.

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