deep_quarantine_scan_tool

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. It explains the two-layer approach (Layer 1 for stats, Q-Agent sees raw content), and explicitly states the risk of compromise. Does not mention if destructive, but likely read-only. Good transparency beyond 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?

Concise and front-loaded: first sentence states purpose, then explains layer details, then usage advice. No wasted words. Every sentence 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?

Given the complexity (deep scan with Q-Agent risk) and presence of output schema, description adequately covers the two-layer mechanism, risk tradeoff, and cross-reference advice. Could mention preconditions (e.g., if content must be quarantined), but overall sufficient.

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 100% with descriptions for both parameters. Description adds no additional context beyond what's in the schema (e.g., 'URL to scan (optional)' is already in schema). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clear verb ('analyze') and resource ('raw unsanitized content'). Specifies it's a deep diagnostic scan. Differentiates from sibling 'quarantine_scan_tool' by noting it runs on original content with higher risk but better detection.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use: 'diagnostic deep-dives on suspicious content'. Includes caution about risk ('Higher risk of Q-Agent compromise') and advises cross-referencing with 'quarantine_scan' for completeness. No when-not, but implied.

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