scan_bucket

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It explains that the tool triggers a scan and indexes records, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not mention whether the scan is asynchronous, whether it is idempotent, or any required permissions or side effects, leaving notable gaps.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose. The param docstrings add needed detail without fluff. Every sentence contributes, and there is no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 simple 2-parameter tool, the description covers the purpose and parameter semantics adequately. The output schema exists, so return values are handled elsewhere. However, it lacks usage guidelines and deeper behavioral details (e.g., asynchronous behavior, error conditions), making it slightly incomplete but not critically so.

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 0%, but the description compensates by explaining both parameters: 'bucket' is the S3 bucket to index, and 'provider_id' is an optional provider connection ID. This adds meaning beyond the schema's bare field titles, though it doesn't provide formats, defaults, or constraints.

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 action: trigger a metadata scan to index object records into the ObjectLens database. It uses a specific verb ('scan') and resource ('S3 bucket'), and the outcome (indexing into a database) distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_bucket_objects or get_object_metadata.

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: use this tool when you want to index a bucket's object records into ObjectLens. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives, prerequisites, or when not to use it. The context is clear but lacks exclusions or comparisons to sibling tools.

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