mcp-seo-audit

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the action ('Remove') without disclosing critical behavioral traits such as whether this is destructive, requires specific permissions, or has irreversible effects. This is inadequate for a mutation tool.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded, with the core purpose in the first sentence and parameter details in a brief, structured format. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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 (a destructive operation with no annotations) and the presence of an output schema, the description is minimally adequate but lacks crucial details like safety warnings or usage context. It meets basic needs but has clear gaps.

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 description adds meaningful context for the single parameter by specifying 'The URL of the site to remove', which clarifies the parameter's purpose beyond the schema's minimal title. With 0% schema description coverage, this compensates well, though it could detail format 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 clearly states the action ('Remove') and resource ('a site from your Search Console properties'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'request_removal' or 'delete_sitemap', which prevents a perfect score.

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 like 'request_removal' or 'delete_sitemap', nor does it mention prerequisites or consequences. This leaves the agent without context for tool selection.

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