FOFA Continuous Search

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions pagination stability but omits details on authentication, rate limits, error handling, or result format. The additional context is minimal.

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 sentences that front-load the action and key pagination concept. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or wasted words.

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 paginated search tool with good schema coverage and an output schema (present but not shown), the description covers the essential pagination mechanism. Missing details like link to initial search could be helpful but not critical.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds little beyond the schema, e.g., 'Encode as qbase64' is already in the schema. No new semantic value provided.

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 searches FOFA assets using a specific API endpoint and mentions continuous pagination via a 'next' value. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like fofa_search, but does not explicitly differentiate them.

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 when stable continuous pagination over large result sets is needed, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this vs. other search tools or when not to use it.

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