nmap_script_help

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention what happens if the script name is invalid, whether network access is required, or how the help is formatted. The description is insufficient for understanding behavioral traits.

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 short sentence, which is concise but lacking in detail. It is not overly verbose, but the brevity sacrifices clarity and completeness.

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 has one parameter and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the output format (despite an output schema existing) or provide enough context for an AI agent to use the tool correctly without additional information.

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 has one parameter with 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain what 'script_name' should be (e.g., format, examples). The description fails to add meaning beyond the schema, which is unacceptable given the low coverage.

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 that the tool retrieves detailed help for NSE scripts. The verb and resource are specific, but it does not differentiate from sibling tools like nmap_script_list or nmap_script_scan, which are closely related.

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 exclusions. It simply states the action without context.

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