list_scans

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

The description mentions it lists 'recent' scans, indicating some ordering, but does not disclose other behavioral traits like whether it returns scans across all users or only those initiated by the current user, or any rate limiting. Since no annotations are provided, the description partially fulfills transparency but lacks depth.

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, clear, front-loaded sentence with zero unnecessary words. It effectively conveys the tool's purpose.

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 tool is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides adequate completeness. However, it could mention the return format (e.g., list of scan objects) to be fully self-contained.

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 already fully describes the 'limit' parameter with a description and default value. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, but given 100% schema coverage, a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'list', the resource 'recent vulnerability scans', and the scope 'for your organization'. It is specific and distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_findings' and 'scan_status'.

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 implies use when a user wants to see recent scans for their organization, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives such as 'scan_status' or 'compare_scans'. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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