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

Annotations already mark it read-only and non-destructive, so the description adds useful behavior beyond that: what address formats are accepted, that it returns an app_id, and the critical display rule about showing site_url and not the internal {slug}.kleap.io host. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: the first defines what the tool resolves, the second gives the workflow trigger, and the third conveys the display caveat. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no filler, despite covering several nuances.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering safety, the description supplies the remaining essential context: accepted inputs, when to invoke it, what to do with the result, and how to present the resolved address to the user. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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 100% with descriptions for query and context, so the baseline is 3. The description goes further by explaining the query forms with examples and linking the resolution result to site_url/custom_domain semantics, which adds meaning beyond the schema alone.

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 a specific action: resolve an address to an app_id, and enumerates accepted address forms (custom domain, kleap.io URL, slug). It clearly differentiates itself from siblings like get_app and list_apps by framing itself as the entry point when a user names a site by address.

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?

Explicitly instructs to use this tool FIRST when the user references a site by address instead of app_id, and directs the agent to pass the returned app_id to get_app / modify_app / publish_app. It implies not to use it when an app_id is already known, though it does not enumerate more distant sibling alternatives like list_apps or search_domains.

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