inspect_target

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It discloses the main actions (connect, list, start profiling) and that it returns tool cards for risk classification, but does not explain side effects (e.g., network calls, state changes), safety, or idempotency.

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 front-loading the main action. The second sentence adds a useful instruction about risk classification. Could be slightly more structured but is appropriately concise.

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?

Covers the main actions and output format adequately, but lacks details about the profiling session workflow, error handling, prerequisites for connecting to a target, and how it fits with sibling tools. Without an output schema, the description provides a text explanation of the return format, which is helpful.

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 has 50% description coverage (only 'goal' is described). The description does not add meaning to 'target' or elaborate on parameter usage beyond what is in the schema. 'Target' remains undocumented.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Connect', 'list', and 'start', and the resource 'target MCP' and its declared tools/resources/prompts. Distinguishes from siblings like list_targets (which lists targets) and lookup_target (looks up a specific target) by being the tool that initiates a profiling session.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like execute_probe or finalize_profile. The description does not mention prerequisites, context of use, 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.