tools_commix

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Execute Commix command injection scanner' without mentioning network activity, potential impact, permissions, or output handling, leaving the agent uninformed about the tool's behavior.

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, which is structurally clean, but it is under-specified. For a tool with three parameters and no annotations, this terse phrasing is more a lack of detail than a concise summary.

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 is too minimal for the tool's complexity. It does not explain how the scanner operates, what 'additional_args' means, what the output looks like, or any prerequisites, making it incomplete in context despite the availability of 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 0%, and the description does not mention any of the parameters (url, data, additional_args). It fails to explain even the required url parameter or the purpose of the optional ones, providing no compensation for the schema's lack of detail.

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 it executes Commix, a command injection scanner, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools because it is the only Commix-specific tool listed.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sqlmap for SQLi or dalfox for XSS. The description simply says 'execute' without any context of use cases or exclusions.

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