Inspect URL indexing status

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

With no annotations, the description covers the operational constraints: permission level and property ownership. It also implies read-only behavior via 'check' and lists the type of information returned, making side effects and access requirements transparent.

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 succinct, two sentences, with the primary purpose stated first. It avoids unnecessary elaboration while delivering all essential information in a well-ordered manner.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's capabilities and constraints. It does not require explanation of return values and is complete for an inspection tool in the context of sibling tools.

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?

All parameters have schema descriptions, and the tool description reinforces the key parameter (inspectionUrl). Since schema coverage is 100%, the description does not need to repeat parameter details; the existing info is sufficient.

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 action ('check') and the resource (URL), listing specific aspects (coverage, canonical, crawl, mobile usability, rich results) and the ownership constraint. It is distinct from sibling tools which handle site management or sitemaps.

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?

It explicitly outlines prerequisites (OWNER permission, owned properties) and implicitly indicates when to use (to inspect URL details). The description provides clear conditions for successful use, leaving no ambiguity about applicability.

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