get_cve_detail

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must convey behavioral traits. It merely states 'Get details' without specifying what details are returned, any authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. This lack of detail is a significant gap for a tool that presumably returns structured data.

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 a single sentence that is clear and front-loaded. It is concise, but could be slightly expanded to include behavioral hints without losing conciseness. However, it efficiently conveys the primary purpose.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not mention the source of the details, the scope of information returned, or any constraints (e.g., only public CVEs). A bit more context would improve completeness.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with a single parameter 'cve_id' described with an example format. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, as it simply restates the parameter. With high schema coverage, baseline score of 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?

The description 'Get details for a specific CVE by ID' uses a specific verb (Get) and resource (details for a specific CVE) with a clear identifier (by ID). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'search_cve' (general search) and 'get_recent_cves' (listing recent CVEs), which serve different purposes.

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 implies usage when a specific CVE ID is known, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_cve' or 'get_recent_cves'. There is no guidance on prerequisites, exclusions, or best practices, leaving the agent to infer context.

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