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

The description does not disclose side effects, output format, or whether inputs affect behavior. The schema hints that parameters are 'discarded' or checked, but the description itself offers no transparency about the tool's actual behavior.

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 brief, but brevity here comes at the expense of necessary detail. It lacks a verb and any mention of output or behavior, making it too minimal to be genuinely useful.

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 no output schema and no explanation of side effects or returned data, the description is incomplete. An agent cannot determine what a successful call yields or how to interpret the catalog content.

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?

Although the schema covers 100% of parameters, the descriptions are nonsensical relative to the stated purpose (e.g., 'discarded after the shape check', 'no disk access'). They do not clarify how any parameter relates to returning HTTP status codes, and all nine are optional, further obscuring their role.

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 is a noun phrase ('Short catalog of common HTTP status codes') with no verb specifying the action or result. It does not state what the tool does with inputs or what it returns, making its purpose ambiguous.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus sibling tools. Given the many similar tools (e.g., fetch-status, web-fetch), the absence of any selection criteria leaves the agent to guess.

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