suppressByFiles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states 'suppress,' implying a mutation, but does not disclose important behavioral traits such as irreversibility, required permissions, or what exactly happens to the suppressed findings. The description is too minimal to be transparent.

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 extremely short with only three words, but this is under-specification, not conciseness. It fails to convey essential information and leaves the agent guessing.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (3 required parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is entirely insufficient. It provides no context on return values, side effects, or how 'by files' relates to the parameters. Completely inadequate for an agent to use correctly.

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?

Although input schema coverage is 100% with basic descriptions (e.g., 'Hash of the scan'), the tool description does not add any meaning beyond the schema. The phrase 'by files' does not correspond clearly to the parameters hash, type, and rule, creating confusion rather than clarity.

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 'Suppress findings by files' indicates a verb (suppress) and a resource (findings), and specifies a mechanism (by files). However, it is vague because the input schema includes parameters like hash, type, and rule, not files, creating ambiguity. It partially distinguishes from sibling tool suppressByRule but lacks clarity on what 'by files' means.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus the sibling tools like suppressByRule or deleteSuppression. There is no context on prerequisites or alternatives.

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