azure_scan_storage_containers

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the tool's behavior: lists containers, checks public access, enumerates blobs, detects sensitive files with specific patterns, identifies SAS tokens, checks encryption, and finds orphaned blobs. It does not mention permissions or side effects, but as a read-only scan, this is sufficient.

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 paragraph but front-loaded with the main purpose and then lists specifics. It is concise without unnecessary words, though bullet points could improve readability.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and empty annotations, the description covers the tool's scope, detection capabilities, and output format options. It mentions default behavior for storageAccountName and maxBlobsPerContainer. Minor absence of performance or permission notes, but overall 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions, but the description adds valuable context: e.g., 'If omitted, scans all storage accounts with public blob access' for storageAccountName, and default maxBlobsPerContainer value. This enhances understanding beyond the schema.

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 'Deep scan of storage account containers and blobs' and lists specific actions like listing containers, checking public access, detecting sensitive files, identifying SAS tokens, etc. It explicitly states it's 'CRITICAL for data exposure assessment', which differentiates it from siblings like 'azure_analyze_storage_security' that might be broader.

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 implies usage for data exposure assessment but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'azure_analyze_storage_security'. No exclusion criteria or context for when not to use it is provided.

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