azure_scan_azure_devops

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

With empty annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions enumeration and checking, but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, discusses side effects, or details authentication beyond PAT requirements. Some transparency but incomplete.

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 well-structured with bullet points and a clear separation of scanning and offensive use. Could be slightly more concise, but front-loads the main purpose effectively.

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 tool's complexity (multiple scanning areas) and no output schema, the description covers enumerations and checks adequately. However, it lacks usage context and behavioral traits like idempotency, making it somewhat incomplete.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline 3. The description repeats scanning focus but does not add new semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides for parameters.

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 is an 'Azure DevOps security scanner' and lists specific enumerations and checks. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on Azure DevOps, with a specific verb 'scan' and resource 'Azure DevOps'.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The 'OFFENSIVE USE' note hints at scenarios but does not clarify when not to use or compare with sibling tools like azure_scan_aks_full.

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