scan_azure_devops

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, what results look like, whether it handles multiple repositories, rate limits, or required authentication scopes. The user must infer behavior from the verb 'Scan.'

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 sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the primary action and resource, making it easy to parse.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns or the structure of the metadata extracted. It also does not clarify the optional 'project' parameter's effect on the scan. For an organization-wide scan tool, this is a significant gap.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema: it clarifies that 'organization' is a URL and that 'pat' is for authentication, but these are already present in the schema descriptions. No additional parameter semantics are provided.

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 a specific verb ('Scan'), a specific resource ('Azure DevOps organization'), a scoping detail ('repositories with wikis'), and an outcome ('extract tool metadata from front matter'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like discover_tools or ingest_repo by focusing on Azure DevOps wiki scanning and metadata extraction.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g., required PAT scopes), and no exclusions. The description simply states what the tool does without contextualizing it against sibling tools.

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