Get information about a published website including its title, view count, size, expiry date, and whether it has been claimed. No authentication required — this is public information. Use this to check if a site is still live, see how many views it has gotten, or check when it expires.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | The slug of the site to check (e.g. "hello-world-k3m"). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that no authentication is required and the information is public. It also enumerates the returned fields, giving a clear idea of behavior. While it doesn't mention edge cases like errors or rate limits, it provides strong transparency for a simple read operation.
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 concise, using two sentences to cover purpose and use cases. The most important information (what it does, the resource, key fields) is front-loaded, with no filler 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 the tool's simplicity, one parameter, and no output schema, the description is complete. It provides the purpose, key returned data, auth status, and typical use cases. The sibling tools are all mutations, so this read-only status checker is well contextualized.
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?
The schema already has 100% coverage for the single 'slug' parameter, including an example. The description adds no new parameter-specific semantics beyond implying the slug is the site identifier, so the schema does the heavy lifting. 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 clearly states the tool gets information about a published website and lists the specific data fields (title, view count, size, expiry date, claimed status). It distinguishes itself from sibling mutation tools (delete, publish, update) by being a read operation.
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 provides explicit use cases: 'check if a site is still live, see how many views it has gotten, or check when it expires.' It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like delete/publish/update, but the read-only nature and use cases make it clear when to use this tool.
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.
Each tool has a clear, non-overlapping purpose: publish creates, get_website_status reads, update modifies, and delete removes. There is no ambiguity between tools.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: publish_website, get_website_status, update_website, delete_website. The pattern is uniform and predictable.
Four tools perfectly cover the core lifecycle for this simple service, with no redundancy. This is well within the typical 3-15 tool range.
The tool set provides complete CRUD (Create, Read, Update, Delete) for websites, covering the entire domain of the service. No obvious gaps exist.