shodan_scan

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Scan a network using Shodan,' omitting critical information such as whether the scan is asynchronous, required permissions, rate limits, or side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to understand 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, concise phrase that efficiently states the tool's core action. It is front-loaded and easy to parse, though it could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness.

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 simplicity of the tool and the presence of an output schema, the description still lacks essential context. It does not explain the scanning scope (specific IPs vs. entire internet), the asynchronous nature, or how the result is retrieved. This incompleteness hinders effective tool selection.

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%, so the schema already describes the parameters. The description adds no extra meaning or context for the 'ips' or 'force' parameters, failing to clarify when 'force' is useful or how 'ips' should be formatted beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('scan') and resource ('network'), clearly indicating the tool's primary function. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools such as shodan_scan_internet or shodan_scan_status, leaving ambiguity about the scope.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites, limitations, or typical use cases.

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