get_scenario_prompt

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

No annotations are provided, and the description simply states 'Retrieve the base prompt' without revealing any behavioral traits like authentication needs, rate limits, or what the prompt entails. While the tool has no parameters, the lack of context on return format or side effects is a gap.

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?

Single, clear sentence that front-loads the action and resource. No wasted 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?

Despite no parameters and many sibling tools, the description fails to explain what the base prompt is used for, how it differs from other prompt tools, or what to expect. Agent may struggle to select it appropriately.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters and 100% documentation coverage. Baseline for 0-param tools is 4, and the description adds no additional semantics since nothing is needed beyond the schema.

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 uses specific verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'base prompt for authoring CrowdSec scenarios', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_scenario_examples or validate_scenario_yaml.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_scenario_examples or get_waf_prompt. The agent is left to infer context from the name alone.

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