summarize_risk

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

Discloses key behavior: fetches from NVD, computes weighted composite score, returns severity breakdown and remediation guidance. Includes the formula and score range. No annotations exist, so description carries full burden, and it provides substantial behavioral details.

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?

Highly concise with no filler. Three short sentences: purpose, process, formula. Front-loaded with the main action. Every sentence adds value.

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 an output schema present, the description adequately covers purpose and process. It mentions expected output (severity breakdown, remediation guidance). Lacks detail on error handling or performance, but given simplicity and single parameter, it is fairly complete.

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% with clear description and example for cve_ids. Description adds minimal new meaning beyond the schema (e.g., mentions 'list of CVE IDs' but schema already specifies that). Baseline score applies as schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

Clearly states 'Aggregate a risk summary for a list of CVE IDs' with a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings lookup_cve (single CVE detail) and search_cves (search) by focusing on multiple CVEs and aggregation.

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?

Implies usage when a list of CVEs is present and an aggregate risk is needed, but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives to siblings. The description lacks exclusion criteria or comparison with similar tools.

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