prioritize_findings

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

Description discloses use of TPU and semantic similarity, indicating a compute-intensive, ML-driven operation. However, it does not mention side effects, permissions, or whether it is read-only, which is relevant given no annotations.

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 concise and well-structured with 'Args' and 'Returns' sections. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundant 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?

The description explains the scoring approach but lacks details on critical terms, sorting, or output structure. However, the presence of an output schema (indicated by context signals) partially mitigates the need for complete output description.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description only restates the parameter name 'scan_id: Scan ID to prioritize' without adding format, source, or constraints, failing to compensate for the schema gap.

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 clearly states the tool prioritizes security findings using TPU-accelerated importance scoring, differentiating it from sibling tools like detection or listing. The verb 'prioritize' and resource 'findings' are specific.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage after a scan via scan_id but does not state prerequisites or when not to use it.

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