pivot_add_pivot

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

No annotations provided, and the description only says 'Add a pivot point,' implying a recording action. It does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether it modifies network config), permissions needed, or reversibility, which is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 highly concise: a single-purpose line followed by a compact parameter list. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 has an output schema (not detailed) and 5 parameters. The description explains the core function and parameters but lacks context on how the pivot point is used (e.g., for chaining) or what the output represents. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 0%, so the description's Args section is the sole documentation. It provides brief but helpful descriptions for all five parameters (e.g., method lists options, subnet provides example). However, descriptions are terse (e.g., 'Additional notes' for notes) and could be more detailed.

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 states 'Add a pivot point for tracking network access chains,' which is a clear verb+resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like pivot_list_pivots (listing) and pivot_chisel_client (specific tool use), though it lacks explicit 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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling pivot tools (e.g., pivot_chisel_client, pivot_ssh_dynamic), the description should clarify that this is for recording pivots, not performing them, but it does not.

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