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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses determinism, keyless access, no LLM usage, and output signing. Cost per call is also mentioned. These traits are fully transparent and helpful for an agent's decision-making.

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 extremely concise (two sentences) yet packed with information. It front-loads the core action and then lists specifics. No wasted words.

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?

No output schema, so description must cover return format. It lists all metadata types returned and mentions 'by source' organization. Missing error handling or edge cases, but sufficient for typical use.

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?

Only one parameter (url) with 100% schema description coverage. The tool description adds context about return content but does not add new parameter-specific details beyond the schema. Baseline of 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?

The description explicitly states the tool returns a signed metadata record containing JSON-LD, OpenGraph, Twitter-card, standard meta, canonical, and title, organized by source. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools by emphasizing determinism, keyless operation, and no LLM involvement.

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 implies use for obtaining verifiable structured metadata (social-card/SEO/schema.org). It does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives, but the context and sibling list provide some implicit guidance.

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