scan_ssl_tls

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It merely states 'Analyze SSL/TLS configuration' without detailing whether the tool makes network requests, requires authentication, is destructive, or what it returns. This is a severe transparency gap.

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 extremely concise (one sentence of 4 words) but severely under-specified. While brevity is valued, the sentence fails to provide essential context about tool behavior, parameters, or outcomes. It is not efficiently informative.

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 the tool's single parameter, lack of output schema, and absence of annotations, the description should compensate by explaining the scope, output, or side effects. It does not, leaving the agent with insufficient information to use the tool correctly.

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?

The input schema has one parameter (target_url) with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema, such as expected format, examples, or constraints. For a required parameter, this omission is critical.

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 states 'Analyze SSL/TLS configuration,' which uses a specific verb ('Analyze') and resource ('SSL/TLS configuration'), making the tool's purpose clear. It distinguishes from siblings like 'scan_website_comprehensive' and 'scan_ports' by focusing on SSL/TLS, but lacks explicit differentiation language.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it specify prerequisites, limitations, or exclusions. This leaves the agent without decision support for choosing among sibling security scanning tools.

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