Loading ToolBench
Autonomous incident response system built on the SANS SIFT Workstation
EvidenceGuard has 3 tools with minimal parameter descriptions and no output schemas documented. All tools accept a single string parameter (image_path) with basic descriptions. Tool descriptions are present but generic (34-50 chars, below the 50-200 char LLM-optimized baseline). No error handling guidance, no pagination support despite likely returning large result sets, and no structured output documentation. The audit logging infrastructure is present but not exposed via tool annotations or error recovery patterns.
List persistence files in a disk image.
List suspicious files in a disk image.
List suspicious user activity in a disk image.
No output schema documentation. Tools return unstructured strings; LLMs cannot parse results or chain downstream calls. Forensic tools likely return structured findings (file paths, timestamps, risk levels) that should be documented as JSON objects.
Parameter descriptions are minimal (single sentence, <20 chars for 'image_path'). LLMs cannot infer expected format, whether paths are local/remote, or what happens if the image is invalid. Descriptions should explain format, constraints, and error cases.
No pagination or result limits documented. Forensic disk scans can return thousands of files; returning all results in a single string response will exhaust context windows and degrade LLM reasoning. Tools should support limit/offset and return structured, paginated results.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-23 | F | 44 | 2026-07-28+ | v2 |
Error handling returns raw error strings ('Error: {result.error}') with no recovery guidance. LLMs cannot determine if errors are retryable, user-fixable, or fatal. Should categorize errors and suggest next steps (e.g., 'Image not found. Verify path and try again.').
Tool descriptions lack context on WHEN to use each tool. 'List persistence files' vs 'List suspicious files' vs 'List user activity' are unclear distinctions. Descriptions should explain the forensic purpose and how they differ (e.g., 'Detects malware persistence mechanisms like startup folders and registry keys').