scan_image

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, which the description supports. It adds detail on output format (critical/high/medium/low vulnerabilities with package names and fix availability). However, it does not disclose network or disk usage, or what happens on errors.

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?

Two concise sentences with no extraneous information. The first sentence clearly states the primary function, and the second summarizes the output.

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 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description provides a useful output summary. However, it lacks guidance on when to choose this tool over sibling tools (e.g., scan_image_grype) and fails to mention any prerequisites (e.g., Trivy installation).

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 parameters are well-documented. The description adds context that the tool uses Trivy and the output structure, but does not provide additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already offers.

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 'Scan a Docker image for known vulnerabilities using Trivy.' It specifies the action (scan) and resource (Docker image), and distinguishes itself from siblings like scan_image_grype by naming Trivy.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like scan_image_grype or scan_filesystem. While it mentions Trivy, there is no guidance on preferred use cases or prerequisites.

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