lc_preview_yara_scan

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only says 'Preview,' which suggests a dry run, but does not disclose what the preview entails (e.g., validation, estimation, results format). No details on side effects, permissions, or limitations.

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 sentence with no wasted words, achieving conciseness. However, given the tool has 5 parameters and no annotations, it is under-specified and lacks necessary detail, making it minimally adequate.

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?

The description is incomplete for a tool with 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. It does not explain what the preview returns, how to interpret results, or any prerequisites. Compared to sibling preview tools, it lacks context-specific details.

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 and no parameter explanations in the description, the agent has no semantic information about parameters like oid, rule, sensor_id, timeout_seconds, or token_ttl_seconds. The description fails to add meaning beyond the schema's minimal definitions.

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's action: 'Preview running an ad-hoc YARA scan on one sensor.' It uses specific verbs and nouns, and the name reinforces the purpose. It distinguishes from sibling preview tools that target different entities (cases, groups, etc.) and from other YARA-related tools.

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 (e.g., running a real scan, listing YARA rules) or prerequisites (e.g., sensor state, rule validity). There is no explicit 'when-to-use' or 'when-not-to-use' information.

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