Get Exploit Source Code

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, non-destructive, idempotent, and open-world hints. Description adds that it returns code from the exploit archive and auto-selects relevant files, which adds context but does not fully compensate for missing output schema or authentication 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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with main action and an important warning. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy.

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?

For a simple retrieval tool without output schema, description adequately covers purpose, ID usage, and optional parameter behavior. Could mention return format but overall 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 descriptions for both parameters. Description reinforces the ID numbering distinction and clarifies behavior when file_path is omitted, enhancing semantics beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves source code of an exploit by platform ID, with specific use cases like analyzing mechanics or reviewing PoC code. Distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_exploit_analysis' and 'search_exploits'.

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?

Provides important guidance on using platform ID (id=XXXXX) over EDB-XXXXX and explains auto-selection of code files when file_path is omitted. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but context is sufficient.

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