epss_batch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states it fetches 'EPSS scores' but does not clarify if it is read-only, destructive, or any side effects. While likely a safe read operation, the description lacks explicit behavioral disclosure.

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 sentence with no wasted words. Every phrase contributes essential information about the tool's capability and constraints.

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 low complexity (1 param, no output schema) the description is nearly complete. It mentions the batch nature and limit, but missing details about the response format (e.g., returns a mapping of CVEs to scores) which could be inferred from sibling tools.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds 'batch' and 'single request' context but does not add meaning beyond the schema's description of 'Array of CVE IDs (max 100)'.

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 verb 'Batch EPSS scores' and the resource 'multiple CVEs' with a specific limit of 100. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'epss_score' (single CVE) and 'epss_above_threshold' (querying).

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 for batch requests instead of individual ones via 'up to 100' and 'single request', but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives. However, the sibling context provides implicit guidance.

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