list_websites

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. 'List websites' doesn't reveal any traits such as whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires permissions, what the output format might be, or if there are rate limits. This leaves the agent with minimal actionable information.

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?

While 'List websites' is concise, it's under-specified rather than efficiently structured. A single phrase doesn't provide enough context to be helpful, and it lacks front-loaded critical information that would aid an agent in understanding the tool's scope or usage.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool that likely returns a list of websites. It doesn't explain what 'websites' means in this context, the format of the output, or any behavioral aspects, leaving significant gaps for the agent to infer.

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 0 parameters with 100% coverage, meaning there are no parameters to document. The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics, so it meets the baseline of 4 for tools with no parameters, as it doesn't introduce confusion or omissions in this area.

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 'List websites' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name without adding specificity. It doesn't clarify what 'websites' refers to (e.g., hosted sites, configured domains, or something else) or distinguish this tool from siblings like 'list_files' or 'list_containers', which could also involve web-related resources.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention context, prerequisites, or exclusions, and with siblings like 'list_files' and 'list_containers' that might overlap in functionality, this lack of differentiation is a significant gap.

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