scan_local

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as what secrets are detected, error handling, performance, or privacy implications. The parameter show_matched_secret_on_logs relates to secret disclosure but is not mentioned in the description.

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, but it lacks structure such as bullet points or sections. It is efficient but could benefit from more organized detail.

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?

Without an output schema, the description fails to explain what the tool returns or how to interpret results. For a security scanning tool, this leaves significant gaps, especially regarding output format and the nature of detected secrets.

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 description coverage is 75%, and the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. For example, it does not explain what the 'n0s1' report format is or the impact of show_matched_secret_on_logs.

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 scans a local filesystem path for leaked secrets, with a specific verb and resource. It is easily distinguishable from sibling tools that scan remote services like GitHub or GitLab.

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 name 'local' and sibling tool names imply its domain, but no when-not-to-use or alternative references are provided.

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