score_page

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. Discloses return fields (grade, score, signals, spend_at_risk, details) but omits side effects, auth, or rate limits.

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?

Two sentences plus a return line. Front-loaded with main purpose. No wasted words.

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?

Covers main functionality, parameters, and return types. Lacks error conditions or limitations but sufficient for a straightforward scoring tool without 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. Explains url and html are mutually exclusive, and verbose is boolean, but does not specify format or constraints. Vague on verbose effect.

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?

Clearly states verb 'score', resource 'landing page', and output 'A-F grade with per-signal breakdown'. Differentiates from sibling tools like audit_mobile and audit_speed.

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?

Explains when to use (pass url or html) but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives. Usage context is implied but lacks exclusions.

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