Get LiveSwapFace links

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation ('Return') but does not confirm the absence of side effects, describe what the returned routes look like, or indicate size/sensitivity of the response.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity edges toward under-specification rather than optimal density.

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 zero-parameter helper this is close to sufficient, but without annotations or an output schema the description should say what the 'routes' response contains and whether it is safe/read-only. It stops just short of what an agent needs to call it confidently.

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 has zero properties, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. No parameter explanation is needed and none is missing.

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 verb 'Return' plus resource 'official website routes used by this server' gives a rough sense of purpose, but 'routes' is ambiguous (URLs? page paths? a map of links?) and the description does not explicitly contrast with the sibling read_official_page, which sounds closely related.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus read_official_page or estimate_session_credits, and no preconditions or exclusions are stated. The agent must infer the intended use entirely from the name.

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