nmap_scan

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the core action and output, omitting important traits such as requiring root for SYN scans (though the schema mentions it), potential network impact, or any prerequisites. It does not disclose how results are formatted beyond 'hosts and open ports'.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and including only essential scope information (target types and output). No filler or repetition.

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 port-scan tool, the description gives a high-level understanding but lacks context on how this fits among the many nmap siblings. It does not describe the output format beyond 'discovered hosts and open ports', and with no output schema, more detail on return structure would be beneficial.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal parameter-specific insight beyond what the schema already provides; it repeats target format support but does not elaborate on port syntax or timing trade-offs.

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 a specific verb ('perform') and resource ('nmap port scan'), and specifies 'basic' to distinguish from more specialized scans like service or OS detection. It also mentions supported target formats and returned data, leaving no ambiguity about the tool's purpose.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus the sibling tools. The word 'basic' implies a simple scan but does not directly state exclusions or mention alternatives like nmap_quick_scan for fast scans or nmap_service_scan for version detection.

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