rt_check_scope_creep

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

No annotations present, so description carries full burden. It states the tool analyzes schemas and flags issues, which is behavioral. However, it does not disclose how it operates, prerequisites, or side effects like modifying state.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff, front-loaded with specifics about what it checks. Every word adds value.

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?

Description fails to connect parameters to its function, lacks output format info, and leaves agent guessing how to invoke it correctly despite full schema coverage.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage, but description does not explain how parameters (command, args, env, timeout) relate to schema analysis. This disconnect leaves the agent confused about tool usage.

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?

Description clearly states the tool analyzes tool schemas for over-permissive parameter types and excessive tool counts, with specific examples. This distinguishes it from sibling tools which focus on other security checks.

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?

Description implies the tool is for schema analysis but does not explain when to use it versus sibling tools like rt_check_auth or sast_code_execution. No explicit when-not or alternative guidance.

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