tools_nikto

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 does not mention the tool's network scanning behavior, potential intrusiveness, or any side effects, offering zero transparency for an operation that likely affects remote systems.

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 conciseness. It omits essential usage details and provides no structured guidance, making it unhelpful despite its brevity.

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 tool is a complex web scanner with multiple parameters, and the description is completely inadequate. With no output schema, no parameter documentation, and no behavioral context, the description cannot support correct tool invocation or result interpretation.

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 schema has 4 parameters (target, tuning, output_format, additional_args) with 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain any of them. The agent receives no information about parameter formats, valid values, or how the parameters affect the tool's execution.

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 Nikto' only gives a verb and the tool name, but does not state what Nikto does (e.g., web vulnerability scanner). It is essentially a tautology of the tool name 'tools_nikto' and fails to distinguish the tool 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 contextual triggers, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without any decision support for tool selection.

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