Scan Terraform for security misconfigurations

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and succeeds: it states 'Runs locally; nothing is uploaded' (privacy), describes the return as 'findings ordered by severity, each with a file, line, and whether an exact fix is available' (output shape), and implies a non-mutating scan. This goes beyond the schema and covers the main behavioral concerns an agent would have.

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 sentences, each earning its place: purpose, when to call, parameter behavior, privacy, and return format. No filler or repetition of schema fields.

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 two-parameter tool with no required fields and a stated output schema, the description provides the invocation trigger, parameter semantics, local execution guarantee, and result ordering in one compact block. Nothing necessary for correct use is missing.

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 0%, yet the description defines both parameters operationally: `files` as 'filename -> HCL content' for unsaved content, and `paths` as 'scan .tf files and directories on disk.' This fully compensates for the empty schema and adds a decision criterion (saved vs unsaved).

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 opens with 'Scan Terraform (HCL) for security misconfigurations and compliance failures'—a specific verb, resource, and purpose. It further delimits scope by specifying .tf content and the two input modes, distinguishing it from human-oriented or fix-oriented siblings.

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?

It explicitly instructs 'Call this after generating or editing any .tf content, before showing it to the user,' giving a clear trigger condition and input choice between files and paths. It does not name sibling alternatives or exclusionary conditions, but the usage context is strong enough to guide selection.

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