get_site_accessRead an owned site's current access policy (mode: public/password/restricted, allowedEmails, allowedDomains, hasPassword). Read-only counterpart to set_site_access — check before changing it.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | owned site slug |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. Description adds context as counterpart to set_site_access and lists returned fields, but no additional behavioral details beyond annotations.
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?
Single sentence with colon-separated list and second clause. Concise, front-loaded, 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?
Given output schema exists (implied), description lists all returned fields clearly. Simple read tool with clear purpose and usage guidance; complete.
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 coverage is 100% with slug described as 'owned site slug'. Description repeats 'owned site' but adds no new meaning beyond what schema provides.
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?
Explicitly states reading an owned site's access policy with specific fields (mode, allowedEmails, etc.). Distinguishes from sibling set_site_access.
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 says to use before changing access (check before setting) and identifies read-only counterpart to set_site_access, guiding when to use vs. alternative.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.