scan_get_parameter

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

The description outlines the parameters and returns scan results, but lacks warnings about potential side effects, authorization needs, or rate limits. Given no annotations, it partially fulfills the burden but misses safety context.

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 well-structured with a clear one-liner followed by Args and Returns sections. It is concise yet informative, though slightly longer than necessary.

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 description covers the 10 parameters and mentions return type, but lacks detail on output structure and lacks guidance on prerequisites or post-conditions. For a moderately complex tool, it is adequate but not fully 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds significant value by explaining each parameter with examples and format hints (e.g., 'key:value pairs separated by |'). However, it does not enumerate valid values for injection_types or database_types.

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 'Test a specific GET parameter for SQL injection,' specifying the verb (test), resource (GET parameter), and scope (specific parameter). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like scan_post_parameter and scan_url.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it or suggest other tools for scanning whole URLs or POST parameters.

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