misp_submit_iocs

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

The description discloses guardrails (validation, rejection, safelist, rate limit), batch sharing of fields, and return JSON structure. Annotations provide hints, but description adds rich behavioral context without contradiction.

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 well-structured: purpose first, then details, then return format. No wasted sentences; each sentence adds value.

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, usage, behavioral details, and return format. Despite no output schema, the JSON structure is documented. Complete for a batch submission tool.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining batch behavior, dry_run workflow, and shared fields. Schema has some descriptions, but description integrates them into a coherent narrative. Schema coverage is high, so baseline 3, plus extra context gives 4.

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 validates and adds many indicators in one call, specifically for adding a list from a report. It distinguishes from siblings like misp_submit_ioc (single) and misp_lookup_iocs (lookup).

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 guides usage with dry_run=true for review, then dry_run=false to add. It implies when to use the batch tool vs single submit.

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