Bbot Scan Active

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

Annotations indicate this is not read-only and not destructive, and the description adds that the tool is aggressive, active, consumes rate limits, and requires approval. It could mention more side effects, but the key behavioral implications are disclosed.

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 brief and front-loaded with the most important risk and usage information: aggressive, requires approval, prefer bbot_scan first. There is no filler or redundant wording.

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?

The description covers purpose, risk, and ordering relative to bbot_scan, but it omits parameter documentation and does not explain what output or return behavior to expect. Given the output schema exists, a bit more behavioral context would help.

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?

The schema has five parameters but zero description coverage. Only 'web-thorough' hints at the preset value; target, modules, max_events, and wait_seconds are left undefined, so the agent must infer their meaning from names alone.

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 actively probes with BBOT and names the involved techniques (web-thorough, spider, paramminer, screenshots). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling bbot_scan tool by explicitly recommending bbot_scan first, so an agent can tell what this tool does.

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 that human approval is required and gives concrete when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance: prefer bbot_scan first because active probing on an unmapped surface wastes rate limits. This is strong actionable usage direction.

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