shannon_start_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 states the action (start a scan) without mentioning side effects, duration, async behavior, authorization needs, or resource implications. This is insufficient for a tool that likely triggers a long-running process.

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, efficient sentence with no filler. It directly conveys the core function and mentions the optional parameters.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It lacks information about scan lifecycle, return values, error handling, and prerequisites. For a complex tool, this is incomplete.

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 71%, with descriptions for url, repo, config, workspace, and output. The description lists these as optional flags but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema provides. It does not explain the two boolean parameters (pipeline_testing, router) in detail, just calling them 'flags'.

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 starts a Shannon Lite scan using URL/repo and optional flags, which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like shannon_status or shannon_stop by focusing on starting a scan, though it could be more precise about the scan type.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like shannon_status or shannon_read_report. It does not specify prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision criteria.

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