cortex-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states this is a read operation ('Get details'), but doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what details are returned. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely interacts with a security analysis system.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a simple lookup tool and front-loads the essential information.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what 'details' are returned, potential error cases, or how this fits into the broader Cortex workflow with siblings. For a security tool with multiple related operations, more context is needed.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'analyzerId' clearly documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying this ID is used to fetch analyzer details, which is already evident from the schema. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 verb 'Get details' and the resource 'specific analyzer by ID', making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'cortex_list_analyzers' or 'cortex_get_job', which also retrieve information about different resources.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't specify that this retrieves details for a single analyzer while 'cortex_list_analyzers' lists multiple, or that it's for looking up by ID rather than name like 'cortex_run_analyzer_by_name'.

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