webdev_html_entity_reference

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

No annotations are provided. The description characterizes the tool as a reference (read-only), but does not explicitly state lack of side effects or behavioral constraints. For a lookup tool, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 three sentences, but the first sentence ('Menu ID: ...') is internal metadata and not helpful to the agent. The core description is concise but could be restructured to front-load the purpose and remove unnecessary details.

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 lookup tool with two required parameters and no output schema, the description provides the basic purpose but lacks crucial details on how to use the parameters and what the response contains, leaving gaps for the agent.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain the parameters. It vaguely mentions looking up entities by 'query' and 'category' but does not clarify their format or allowed values. This lacks specific guidance beyond the schema.

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 it is a 'Complete reference of HTML character entities' and specifies the verb 'Lookup' with specific resources: 'HTML entities, numeric codes, and Unicode values for special characters.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools which are conversions or encodings.

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 hints at using 'describe_tool' for full guidance, implying a simple lookup. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like encoding_decoding_html_entities. The context is clear but lacks exclusion criteria.

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