Lists past remediation actions for a specific vulnerability

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, etc. The description adds a permission requirement ('Perm: view_vulnerabilities') but does not disclose other behaviors like pagination or sorting. Description adds some value but does not significantly exceed 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 brief but has a cut-off sentence (ellipsis). It could be more efficient by merging the two sentences and completing the thought. Front-loaded with 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?

While output schema exists and annotations are rich, the description fails to explain pagination, filtering, or response format despite 10 parameters. The description is minimal for a tool with such complexity.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents all 10 parameters. The description does not provide additional meaning or context beyond what is already in the schema.

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 'Lists past remediation actions for a specific vulnerability', which matches the tool name and distinguishes it from sibling tools like create, update, delete, and plan remediation actions.

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 (e.g., create_cve_remediation, cve_remediation_plan). No when-not-to-use or context provided beyond the basic purpose.

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