theharvester_hosts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Quick search' without detailing operations (e.g., DNS queries, API calls), whether it is read-only, or required permissions. The parameters imply DNS brute force and resolution, but these behaviors are not described. This lack of transparency is a significant gap given no annotations.

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, concise sentence that immediately communicates the tool's purpose. It is well front-loaded and contains no unnecessary 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?

The tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools requiring clearer differentiation. The description is too brief to cover what the tool does in detail, what the output looks like, or how to use the parameters effectively. Given the complexity, it falls short of being complete.

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 100% description coverage for all 4 parameters, so the schema itself adequately documents them. The description adds no additional context beyond stating the tool's focus on subdomains/hosts. With high schema coverage, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 purpose: 'Quick search focused on discovering subdomains and hosts for a domain.' It uses a specific verb ('search') and resource ('subdomains and hosts'), and the focus on 'quick' distinguishes it from more comprehensive sibling tools like theharvester_full_recon and theharvester_dns_brute.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for quick subdomain/host discovery, but does not mention when not to use it or suggest other tools for other tasks. Sibling tools like theharvester_search and theharvester_dns_brute overlap, but no differentiation is provided.

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