detect_platform

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It reveals latency differences (milliseconds for hostname-detectable, seconds for custom domains) and describes the probing mechanism. However, it omits any rate limits or usage quotas.

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 moderately long but well-structured, starting with the core purpose and then adding details. Each sentence contributes useful information 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?

No output schema exists, so the description details all return fields ({platform, confidence, archive_method, forward_method, required_credentials, instructions}) and explains their roles. The input is simple. The tool is fully specified.

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% for the one parameter (url). The description adds value by explaining hostname-match short-circuits probing, which is not in the schema. This extra context gives the agent a better understanding of parameter behavior.

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 detects the content platform behind a URL, lists specific platforms (Substack, Beehiiv, etc.), and explains return values including onboarding workflow. It is distinct from sibling tools which deal with licenses and registry.

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 indicates it is a public no-auth lookup, implying use without authentication. It does not explicitly compare to siblings, but the sibling tools are sufficiently different that no confusion arises.

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