VirusTotal: informe por hash

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description aligns by indicating a read-only query. It adds the context of 70+ antivirus engines, which is beyond annotations, but lacks details on rate limits or result structure.

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, front-loaded with the key action and resource, with no extraneous 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?

Given one parameter, no output schema, and annotations present, the description is adequate but minimal. It could mention the kind of reputation data returned (e.g., detection ratio, last analysis) or usage hints like requiring a hash from a prior scan.

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 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents the sha256 parameter fully. The description merely restates the parameter's purpose without adding new semantic value.

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 queries file reputation via SHA-256 from VirusTotal, naming the specific resource (70+ antivirus engines) and distinguishing it from siblings like vt_upload_file or mobsf_scan.

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 SHA-256 hash is available, but it does not explicitly state when to use versus alternative tools like vt_upload_file or mobsf_scan, nor does it provide exclusion criteria.

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