Check public post URLs

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive behavior, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful context that it checks URLs once and verifies HTTP status, title text, and rendered SEO metadata, but does not disclose auth needs, rate limits, timeouts, or error 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?

A single compact sentence front-loads the action and verification targets with no redundant or filler language.

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 read-only external check with annotations and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate but has clear gaps in usage routing and parameter explanation. It tells the agent what is checked, but not when to choose it over closely related live-check siblings.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It mentions expected title text and rendered SEO metadata, but does not explain the required slug/title fields, the nested post array structure, or the maxItems/minItems constraints.

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 uses a specific verb ('Check/verify') and resource ('configured public URLs'), and the tool name/title make clear it targets posts rather than pages, distinguishing it from sibling check_live_pages. It also specifies the verification targets: HTTP status, expected title text, and supplied rendered SEO metadata.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as check_live_pages, check_connection, or check_site_health. The phrase 'once' implies a one-shot check but does not state conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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