Search CVEs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds auth context ('Free, no API key') and a parameter conflict rule, which is helpful, but omits pagination, rate-limit, and return-behavior details. It adds some value beyond annotations but is not rich.

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?

Three tightly written sentences, front-loaded with search modes and key constraints. Every sentence carries signal—filters, free access, and mutual exclusivity—with no redundant restatement of the title.

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?

For a 9-parameter search tool with no schema descriptions and no output schema, the description covers the core query and two important filters. However, it omits pagination, date-bound, and count/limit semantics, so it is adequate for basic invocation but not fully complete.

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% across 9 parameters. The description explains product, cpe23 format, KEV filtering, EPSS sorting, and product/cpe23 exclusivity, but leaves skip, count, limit, start_date, and end_date undocumented. It only partially compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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?

States the verb 'Search' and resource 'CVEDB', plus the two query modes: product or CPE 2.3. This clearly identifies a CVE search tool, but it does not explicitly name or differentiate from siblings like shodan_cve or shodan_cpes.

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?

Gives useful context ('Free, no API key') and a mutual-exclusivity rule ('Do not pass product and cpe23 together'), but does not state when to use this tool versus shodan_cve or when to choose product over cpe23. Usage is implied rather than explicitly routed.

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