create_scan_config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the action but does not disclose side effects, permissions, idempotency, or what happens on success. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap beyond what the name alone implies.

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, focused sentence with no redundant wording. It states the essential purpose without any filler, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 is a simple create operation with four well-documented parameters and no output schema. The description is adequate for basic understanding but lacks context about what a scan configuration is, how it relates to the application, or any prerequisites or dependencies that might affect usage.

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 provides full descriptions for all four parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal parameter meaning beyond 'for an application', which maps to the app_id parameter, but it does not add value beyond the schema.

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 action ('Create'), the resource ('a new scan configuration'), and the scope ('for an application'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_scan_config or list_scan_configs, which have different verbs and 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?

Usage is implied by the verb 'Create' and the resource type, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives or any prerequisites. The phrase 'for an application' gives some context, but no exclusions 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.