Retrieve recent scans for a project by providing its project ID. Set the limit parameter to control the number of results, from 1 to 100.
List recent scans for a project. Limit must be between 1 and 100.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| project_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It adds a useful constraint ('Limit must be between 1 and 100') and implies a read-only listing, but does not explain ordering, pagination, or permissions.
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 short sentences with no filler; the purpose and the limit constraint are front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.
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 tool is simple, has an output schema, and the description covers its core operation and the key limit constraint. Minor gaps like sorting semantics do not prevent correct invocation.
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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It maps project_id via 'for a project' and gives the valid range for limit, but it does not clarify optionality or other constraints.
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 states a specific verb and resource ('List recent scans for a project'), making the tool's purpose clear. It is distinguishable from siblings like list_projects and get_scan, though it does not explicitly call out which sibling to use instead.
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 phrase 'for a project' implies the intended context: retrieve scans scoped to a project_id. There is no explicit when-to-use or exclusion guidance compared to sibling tools like get_scan or get_scan_results.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.