get_crawler_watch_offerReturn the exact $9 monthly price, one-site scope, 15-minute check cadence, two-check confirmation, delivery and cancellation paths, and synthetic-check limitations. This tool is informational: present the offer and require explicit user confirmation before any separate checkout or purchase action.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond annotations (readOnly, idempotent, etc.), description adds that it returns specific offer components and requires user confirmation, enriching 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 concise sentences cover purpose and guidelines without waste, front-loading key return details.
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?
Despite no output schema, description fully enumerates returned fields (price, scope, cadence, etc.) and usage context, making it complete for an informational tool.
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?
No parameters exist; schema coverage is 100% so baseline is 4. No additional parameter info needed.
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?
Description clearly states it returns specific offer details (price, scope, cadence) and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_full_report_offer or get_practice_radar_offer.
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 states the tool is informational and requires user confirmation before any purchase action, guiding the agent on when and how to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
The first two tools (audit_public_website, check_ai_crawler_policy) are clearly distinct active scanning tools. The three 'get_*_offer' tools all return pricing information but for different products (crawler watch, full report, practice radar), making them distinguishable by product name.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case: 'audit_public_website', 'check_ai_crawler_policy', and three 'get_*_offer' tools. The verbs 'audit', 'check', and 'get' clearly indicate the action, and the nouns precisely describe the target.
With 5 tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose: two core monitoring actions (audit and policy check) and three informational offer tools for different products. This covers the essential functionality without unnecessary bloat.
The server covers scanning and policy checking but lacks tools to actually purchase or activate monitoring services after showing offers. Users must leave the MCP to complete transactions, creating a dead-end for the offer flows.