scanner_get_findings

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It discloses that the tool is read-only (listing), specifies returned fields and ordering, and implies the scan must be completed. No contradictions. Missing details like pagination or error states, but adequate for a simple list tool.

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?

Single sentence with 21 words, no filler. Front-loaded with verb and resource, efficiently communicates purpose and output characteristics (fields, ordering). Every word earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains return values (listing fields and ordering). Combined with sibling names, the usage context is clear. No missing crucial information for agent decision-making.

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% (the single 'scan_id' parameter is already documented in the schema with a basic description). The description adds the constraint that the scan must be completed, which adds modest semantic value beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('security findings of a completed scan'), lists key fields, and clearly distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., scanner_get_scan_status, scanner_start_scan) by focusing on results rather than status or initiation.

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 explicitly states 'of a completed scan', implying the scan must be finished before using this tool. It provides clear context but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools for different scenarios.

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