resolve_uri

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

No annotations provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the core action without mentioning side effects, authentication, rate limits, or error handling. The agent is left uninformed about potential risks or constraints.

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?

A single, well-crafted sentence that front-loads the key action and outcome. No unnecessary words, and the structure is optimal for quick agent comprehension.

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?

The description covers the core functionality but lacks details on return values, error conditions, or behavior with invalid URIs. Given the simplicity of the tool (2 parameters, no output schema), this may be minimally viable but leaves 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds context that the result is a deployment URL and that content negotiation is used, but this does not significantly deepen understanding beyond the parameter descriptions.

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 resolves a persistent URI to a deployment URL using content negotiation. The verb 'resolve' and resource 'persistent URI' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'resolve_term' which likely resolves terms differently.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not indicate when to prefer 'resolve_uri' over 'resolve_term' or 'explore_vocabulary', leaving the agent to guess the appropriate context.

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