nmap_udp_scan

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions using the -sU flag and probing UDP services, but lacks details on required permissions (though sudo parameter hints at root), timeouts, impact (non-destructive), or output. For a security scanning tool, more transparency is expected.

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 extremely short (single sentence), which is concise but overly vague. It could be expanded with key parameter details while remaining succinct. It is front-loaded with the purpose, but the lack of structure harms clarity.

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 four parameters, no annotations, and an output schema (though not shown), the description is insufficient. It does not explain what the output might be, how to interpret results, or the significance of the sudo and timeout parameters. The brevity leaves significant gaps.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain parameters. It does not mention any of the four parameters (target, ports, sudo, timeout) beyond what is in the schema. This is a critical gap, leaving the agent without guidance on port formats or default behavior.

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 performs UDP port scanning (-sU) and probes UDP services. It is specific about the resource (UDP ports) and the action (scan). However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like nmap_service_scan, which might also involve UDP, but the focus on UDP ports is clear.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., nmap_service_scan or nmap_comprehensive). No prerequisites, exclusions, or contextual hints are provided. The agent is left to infer usage solely from the tool name and brief description.

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