crawl_site

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns structured JSON but does not mention side effects such as sending a large number of requests to the target site, potential rate limiting, execution time, or error handling. This lack of behavioral transparency beyond the basic action is a significant gap for a potentially heavy 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 two sentences that front-load the core action and result, and it includes a use case. Every word is purposeful, with no redundancy or filler.

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 complexity (10 parameters, no output schema), the description provides the core purpose and a use case but lacks behavioral details like execution time, rate limits, and impact on the target site. The return format is described as structured JSON but not detailed; this is acceptable given the schema's parameter coverage, but the description does not fully compensate for the lack of annotations and output schema.

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 100% coverage with descriptions for all 10 parameters, so the description does not need to repeat them. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline of 3.

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 runs a full site crawl with SiteOne Crawler and returns structured JSON with SEO, performance, and security metrics. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like crawl_single_page by emphasizing 'full' and 'comprehensive site audits.'

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 explicitly says 'Use for comprehensive site audits,' which indicates when to choose this tool over alternatives like crawl_single_page. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear that this is for full-site audits rather than single-page checks.

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