get_remediations

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

The description explains the algorithm (min-cut) and output format (list with coverage percentages), providing behavioral insight. However, it does not disclose authorization needs or behavior when no attack paths exist, but annotations are missing.

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?

Extremely concise, front-loaded with purpose, and each sentence adds value. No redundant information.

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 provides essential information about the algorithm and return type, but lacks explanation for the 'snapshot_id' parameter and broader context. Acceptable but minimal.

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 has 0% description coverage; the description only explains 'max_cuts' (default 5) but fails to mention 'snapshot_id' parameter at all. This leaves a gap for the agent.

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 the tool finds optimal remediations to block attack paths, using a specific algorithm (min-cut). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'check_access' or 'explain_path' by focusing on remediation solutions.

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 (e.g., 'explain_finding' or 'get_attack_paths'). Lacks context for preferences, prerequisites, or exclusion scenarios.

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