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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and discloses the key behavioral trait: this is an account-gated request that returns a one-time browser approval flow rather than creating an account itself. It does not discuss repeated calls, side effects, or error behavior, which keeps it from a 5.

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 three sentences and largely front-loaded: it establishes the account constraint, then the return behavior, then the single-page alternative. It is efficient, though the first sentence spends some space defining a whole-site scan rather than directly stating the tool action.

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?

For a one-parameter onboarding/request tool with no annotations or output schema, the description gives enough context about the prerequisite account connection and the ordered steps returned. It could be slightly more complete by stating what happens if the agent is already connected or whether calling it has any side effects.

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 single optional url parameter is already fully documented in the schema, including that it is used only to word the steps. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the high schema coverage justifies the baseline score of 3.

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 explains that this tool does not itself run a scan but returns the ordered steps a person must take to connect the agent to their Bot Appétit account. It names the relevant sibling tools and explicitly distinguishes the whole-site path from scan_page for single pages.

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?

It gives clear context: use this for whole-site scans that require an account connection, and use scan_page instead for a single page because that path is free and needs no account. It also implies that start_site_scan becomes usable after connection, though it does not explicitly say to use start_site_scan once already connected.

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