gobuster_dir

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses some behavioral traits such as executing remotely via SSH and using wordlist-based brute forcing. However, it omits details about active scanning consequences, rate limits, or how results are returned, leaving gaps in transparency.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. It is concise, free of redundancy, and quickly conveys what the tool does.

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 complexity (16 parameters) and lack of an output schema, the description covers the core purpose and remote execution but does not explain expected output, interpretation of results, or typical usage nuances. This leaves the tool under-specified for an agent unfamiliar with gobuster's behavior.

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 provides 100% coverage for all 16 parameters, so the baseline is met. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond mentioning wordlist-based brute forcing, which loosely relates to the wordlist parameter but doesn't enhance understanding of any specific parameter.

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's function as 'Directory/file enumeration mode' with the objective to discover hidden directories and files on web servers. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like gobuster_dns and gobuster_vhost by focusing on path brute-forcing.

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 provides clear context by specifying this mode is for directory/file enumeration via wordlist-based brute forcing, implying when to use it. However, it doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use it, stopping short of full prescriptive guidance.

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