Fetch CVE vulnerability template

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

With no annotations, the description must fully convey behavior. It lists the type of returned data (metadata, severity, etc.), which is helpful for a read operation. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, nor does it mention potential costs or rate limits associated with the paid API source.

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 two concise sentences that directly state the tool's purpose and output. No extraneous information, and it is front-loaded with the main action.

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 fetch tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and return content. However, it lacks details on the optional 'source' parameter and does not mention any constraints or limitations, which leaves some gaps in completeness.

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 0%, so the description must clarify parameter meaning. It explains 'cve_id' implicitly by context, but the 'source' parameter is not described at all. The description says 'from multiple sources' but does not specify valid values or default behavior, leaving ambiguity for the agent.

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 the tool retrieves a CVE vulnerability template from multiple sources and lists what is returned (metadata, severity, etc.). It specifies the verb 'retrieve' and the resource 'CVE vulnerability template', but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tool 'fetch_cve_from_all_sources' which might have a broader scope.

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 like 'fetch_cve_from_all_sources' or 'list_cve_sources'. It does not mention the optional 'source' parameter or when to specify one source over the other, nor any prerequisites or exclusions.

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