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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral transparency. It fails to disclose side effects, prerequisites (e.g., valid URL), or failure modes, only listing output fields and cost.

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, clear sentence that includes essential information (cost). It is concise but could be better structured with bullet points or separators for readability.

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?

Given the low parameter coverage, missing output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is minimal. It lists return fields but lacks error handling, prerequisites, or guidance, making it insufficient for complete understanding.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not add parameter semantics. It states url is needed but omits format, constraints, or examples, failing to compensate for the missing schema.

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 tool retrieves page metadata and lists specific types (title, description, Open Graph, canonical URL, favicon, language). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like web_extract or summarize_url.

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?

The description mentions cost ($0.002) but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like web_extract or unshorten_url. Usage context is implied but not explicit.

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