buy_listed_ship

3 findings on this tool

1. highexcessive agencyf-r3-buy_listed_ship

   Tool `buy_listed_ship` name implies a side effect that is not declared

   `buy_listed_ship` looks like a side-effecting tool (its name contains a mutation verb), but its `side_effects` declaration is []. A policy synthesizer cannot produce safe rules for this tool because it cannot tell what it actually does.

   fix: Declare the tool's true side effects explicitly. If the tool is genuinely read-only, rename it to match (e.g. `email.preview` rather than `email.send`).

   OWASP LLM08NIST MEASURE-2.6ATLAS T0051
2. mediumunconstrained inputf-r1-buy_listed_ship

   Tool `buy_listed_ship` accepts unconstrained string input

   The following string parameter(s) have no `maxLength` constraint: `listing_id`, `session_id`. Unbounded strings let an attacker stuff arbitrary payloads through the tool, including indirect-injection content.

   fix: Add a `maxLength` to each string property, or constrain with an `enum` or `pattern`. Most legitimate tool inputs fit under a few hundred bytes.

   OWASP LLM01NIST MEASURE-2.3ATLAS T0051
3. mediumexcessive agencyf-r5-buy_listed_ship

   Tool `buy_listed_ship` description mentions money but no `money` side-effect is declared

   Description: "Purchase a ship from the exchange (Buy a ship from the exchange. Must be docked at the same base. Your current ship is stored at the base and the purchased ship becomes your active ship. Credits go directly to the seller.)" -- this references money/payment/refund/etc., but the declared side_effects ([]) don't include `money`. A capframe-bind policy that relies on declared side_effects to scope spend caveats will under-scope this tool.

   fix: Add `money` to the tool's `side_effects` declaration, or rewrite the description to clarify that no actual money moves.

   OWASP LLM08NIST MEASURE-2.6ATLAS T0040