onpage_analysis

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool costs credits and requires an API key, but does not describe the return format, side effects, or execution time. However, since an output schema exists, details of the return are covered there.

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, consisting of two short sentences that convey the purpose, cost, and requirements without any unnecessary 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 presence of an output schema, the description covers the main purpose, cost, and prerequisite. However, it lacks details about the 24-point analysis scope and any limitations or example use cases. For a simple tool with two parameters, it is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 input schema lists 'url' and 'keyword' with no descriptions (0% coverage). The description mentions 'keyword, content, technical checks' but does not clarify what the keyword parameter should be or how it is used. The parameter semantics are insufficient.

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 'Run 24-point OnPage SEO analysis: keyword, content, technical checks', which is a specific verb+resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools that focus on individual aspects (e.g., check_links, check_structured_data).

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 includes usage guidance: it mentions the credit cost (15) and the requirement for VISIBLYAI_API_KEY. It also suggests using get_account_info to check balance, which is a practical alternative for verifying prerequisites.

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