tools_katana

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says nothing about safety, side effects, output format, or required permissions, offering zero transparency beyond the minimal act of execution.

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 extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than valuable conciseness. Every word is wasted because it provides no actionable information; a single sentence that adds no meaning does not earn its place.

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?

With no output schema, no parameter descriptions, and no annotations, the description is grossly incomplete for a tool that executes an external program. The agent cannot understand inputs, outputs, or execution context, making the tool effectively unusable without external knowledge.

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 compensate by explaining the url or additional_args parameters. The agent has no information about what values are expected or how they affect behavior, making parameter usage entirely guesswork.

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 "Execute katana" is a tautology that restates the tool name without explaining what katana does. It lacks any specific verb+resource detail, such as web crawling or scanning, making it impossible for an agent to understand the tool's purpose or distinguish it from siblings like tools_nmap or tools_gobuster.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description provides no context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess based solely on the tool name.

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