scan_endpoints

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavioral traits. It notes recursive scanning of text files but misses details on output format, whether it's read-only, permissions required, 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?

Three sentences, no unnecessary words. Uses 'Args:' formatting but remains concise. The description 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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, description covers the core purpose. However, it lacks output format or error details, making it adequate but not fully complete.

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?

Only one parameter (analysis_dir) with schema type 'string' but no schema description. Description adds 'Path to the analysis directory', providing basic meaning. With low schema coverage (0%), this is adequate but not enriched.

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 verb ('scan') and resource ('analysis directory') and specifies what it finds (hardcoded URLs, domains, API paths). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like analyze_linked_frameworks or analyze_macho_archs.

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 vs alternatives (siblings listed but no contrast). Implies use for network endpoint clues but lacks explicit when-to or when-not-to instructions.

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