azure_scan_all_locations

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

Annotations are empty, so the description carries full burden. It describes scanning behavior but does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or disclose any side effects, rate limits, or permissions needed. No contradiction with annotations.

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 front-load the purpose and key usage details. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description does not explain return format, but the output format parameter is defined. The description is complete enough for a scanning tool with clear presets and resource types, though pagination or performance notes could be beneficial.

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 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond schema by explaining location presets and giving examples, and clarifying the scope of 'common' and 'all'.

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 it scans multiple Azure locations for resources, lists supported resource types (vms, storage, nsgs, aks, sql, keyvaults, public_ips, all), and distinguishes from sibling tools that focus on single resource types or specific analysis.

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 clear guidance on using presets ('common' for 10 locations, 'all' for 45+ locations) and custom locations, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives.

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