Build a remediation plan for a CVE or an endpoint (read-only)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the critical behavior that it does not execute and should be used to generate input for deployment, which is beyond 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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences that convey purpose and key constraints with no wasted words.

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 read-only correlation tool with an output schema and rich annotations, the description covers purpose, usage guidelines, and behavioral notes, including the important instruction to pass to a sibling tool. No gaps remain.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description does not provide additional semantic context for parameters beyond what the schema already offers.

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 'Read-only correlation of vulnerabilities and missing updates', specifying the verb and resource. It also distinguishes from siblings like action1_create_cve_remediation by noting it does not execute. However, it could be more explicit about the output being a remediation plan.

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?

Provides explicit when-not-to-use: 'Does NOT execute' and direct alternative: 'pass the result to action1_deploy_update'. The title also indicates read-only usage.

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