Cloud Asset Discovery

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

The description discloses behavioral traits beyond the annotations: it says the tool is aggressive, requires human approval, runs specific external scanners, and applies verification steps (checking against engagement scope and ownership evidence). This adds transparency not present in the readOnlyHint or destructiveHint flags.

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 concise and well-structured: it opens with a warning, states the purpose, and then adds relevant details about the tools used and the verification steps. It contains no unnecessary fluff.

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 gives a solid overview but lacks details about the return format (despite having an output schema) and does not explain the optional providers parameter. Nevertheless, it provides enough context for the primary use case.

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 two parameters: keyword (string, required) and providers (array of strings, optional). The description explains the role of keyword ('guessing names from a keyword') but provides no information about the providers parameter. Since schema descriptions are absent, the description only partially compensates for the parameter semantics.

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's purpose: 'Discover public cloud storage by guessing names from a keyword.' It specifies verb (Discover) and resource (public cloud storage), and distinguishes it from siblings by mentioning that it runs cloud_enum and S3Scanner.

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 provides usage guidance by labeling the tool as 'AGGRESSIVE — requires human approval,' indicating caution and the need for authorization. It also notes that results are filtered against engagement scope and ownership. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternative discovery tools in the sibling list.

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