arvan_iac_trivy_config

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

The description states 'scan', implying read-only behavior, but annotations do not mark it as read-only (readOnlyHint: false). No additional behavioral details are provided, such as output format or required permissions. The description adds minimal value beyond the name.

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 concise (one sentence) but lacks structure. Important details are missing, and it does not follow a pattern that aids quick comprehension. It earns a neutral score.

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's purpose (security scanning) and the two optional parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'IaC/config' includes, what the output looks like (no output schema), or how to use the parameters. Annotations provide no help.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the parameters 'files' and 'directory' at all. Users are left guessing how to structure input (e.g., file format for 'files' object). The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 scans IaC/config for security issues using Trivy's config subcommand. It uses a specific verb ('scan') and resource ('IaC/config'), and the mention of Trivy distinguishes it from other IaC tools in the sibling list like checkov or tfsec.

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, nor does it mention any prerequisites or scenarios where it should not be used. The sibling list includes many security scanning tools, making such guidance important.

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