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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose one key behavior: query and fragment are dropped. However, it does not mention error behavior, normalization specifics, or whether the unrelated host/json/zone parameters are ignored.

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 deliver the essential information with no filler. The core behavior and the dropped components are 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?

For a simple read-only tool this is mostly adequate, but the lack of an output schema means the description should more precisely define 'origin' and 'path' and address invalid or non-HTTPS URLs. The presence of unrelated optional parameters also creates ambiguity that is left unresolved.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3 and the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the url param, and it does not explain why json, host, or zone appear in the schema.

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 verb ('Return'), a specific resource ('a URL'), and the exact outputs ('origin, host, and path'). It also clarifies that query and fragment are dropped, which distinguishes it from URL-related siblings like domain-shape or citation.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool instead of a sibling, and names no alternatives or exclusions. An agent must infer the use case from the tool name and output list.

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