scan_with_baseline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns only new findings, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, what happens if the baseline file is missing, or if the findings are saved or persisted. Important behaviors are omitted.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and result. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and prerequisite. No redundancy or filler.

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 four parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides enough context for the core functionality but leaves gaps. It does not explain the output format beyond 'new findings', nor does it address error cases (e.g., missing baseline) or update behavior. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 all parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds minimal parameter-specific meaning: it references the baseline concept (relevant to baseline_path) and implies the 'code' parameter is the input. It does not add substantial value beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation of 3.

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 uses a specific verb ('scan') and resource ('code') with a clear differentiator: 'compare against a saved baseline, returning only NEW findings'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like scan_code, scan_file, and scan_directory, which do not mention baseline comparison.

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 explicitly states a prerequisite: 'Use save_baseline first to create a baseline.' This provides clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, though the purpose implies it is for incremental scanning.

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