inkog_scan

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

No annotations provided. Description describes what it scans for but does not disclose behavioral traits like network calls, resource impact, or required permissions. It is likely read-only but not explicitly stated.

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, 60 words, front-loaded with purpose. No wasted words. Efficiently communicates key information.

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?

Despite no output schema and no annotations, the description adequately covers tool purpose, target vulnerabilities, supported frameworks, and usage scenario. Missing return value details but schema covers output format.

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 coverage is 100%, with clear descriptions for all 5 parameters. Description adds little beyond summarizing the scanning purpose. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it is a security copilot for AI agent development, scanning for specific vulnerabilities. It distinguishes itself from siblings like inkog_mcp_scan by focusing on general AI agent frameworks, but does not explicitly differentiate from other scan tools.

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?

Provides explicit usage context: 'Use this whenever building, reviewing, or deploying AI agents to catch security issues before they reach production.' Does not mention when not to use or alternatives like inkog_deep_scan.

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