a11y_analyze

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose side effects, return behavior, or operational details. It only says 'Analyze', which implies a read operation but does not state whether it runs a scan, returns a report, requires authentication, or has any rate limits. The description is entirely silent on what happens when called.

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 a single, short sentence that is easy to parse and front-loaded with the action. However, it is so brief that it omits critical information, so it is not appropriately sized for a tool that likely has more complexity than one sentence can convey. It is concise but under-specified.

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?

With only one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is the sole source of guidance. It explains the basic purpose but fails to describe what the tool returns, how results are structured, or any constraints. An agent calling this tool would have no idea what to expect in the response, making it incomplete.

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%, and the parameter 'url' has a clear description ('URL or HTML path'). The description adds no additional context about the parameter's format, accepted schemes, or edge cases. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema already covers the parameter.

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 states a clear verb (Analyze) and resource (a page/site) and mentions the domain (wcag/accessibility). However, the term 'Analyze' is generic and does not distinguish this tool from siblings like a11y_check, a11y_report, or a11y_status, which likely have more specific scopes. It is not a tautology but lacks differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling tools. No conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned. The agent has no way to know if this is the right tool for a quick check, a detailed report, or a status query.

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