get_scan

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 'Get detailed information' which implies a read-only operation, but does not explicitly confirm no side effects, required permissions, or possible errors. For a simple getter, the description is minimal but acceptable; however, it adds little beyond what the tool name 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 redundancy or filler. It efficiently communicates the core function without wasting tokens.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no nested objects) and the schema is thorough for inputs. However, there is no output schema, and the description does not specify what 'detailed information' includes or how it differs from related scan tools like get_scan_execution_details. The description is adequate for a simple getter but leaves some ambiguity about return content.

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 covers 100% of the single parameter (scan_id) with a clear description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, but the schema already provides sufficient semantic information. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 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' and the resource 'scan' with the scope 'specific' and 'detailed information'. It distinguishes from list_scans (which lists multiple scans) but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_scan_execution_details. Clear but lacking explicit sibling differentiation.

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. The description does not mention prerequisites (e.g., having a scan_id), nor does it suggest when to choose get_scan over get_scan_execution_details or list_scans. There are no usage context or exclusion notes.

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