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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the description adds value by detailing the observable evidence and explicitly stating what the tool does NOT guarantee (AI crawling, ranking, etc.), which is good behavioral context.

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?

Two short sentences that immediately convey the tool's function and limitations. No redundant words, perfectly front-loaded.

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 simple tool (1 param, no output schema) and rich annotations, the description covers the key aspects: what the scan does, what it returns, and its limitations. Could have included more detail on the return format, but sufficient for the tool's complexity.

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 has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'url', with a clear description including allowed and rejected targets. The description does not add extra meaning, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states it runs a three-signal readiness scan for a public website, specifying the three signals (business identity, semantic reading path, explicit action path). Distinguishes from siblings like check_ai_crawler_policy and get_crawler_watch_offer which have different purposes.

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?

States when to use: for a free readiness scan of a public website. Implicitly differentiates from siblings through description content, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool references.

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