bing_crawl_issues

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states what the tool retrieves but does not disclose behavioral traits such as authentication needs, pagination, or data freshness. Minimal context.

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, concise phrase with no wasted words. However, it is slightly terse and could benefit from a bit more structure.

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?

Although an output schema exists (which may explain return values), the description lacks context about the scope of issues (e.g., timeframe, severity) and fails to make the tool self-contained. Given the low parameter count, more detail is expected.

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?

The schema has one required parameter (site_url) with 0% description coverage. The description does not add any meaning to this parameter—no format, examples, or constraints are mentioned.

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 it retrieves crawl errors, blocked URLs, and DNS issues from Bingbot. It uses specific terms like 'crawl errors' and 'Bingbot', but does not differentiate from sibling tools like bing_url_info or bing_page_stats.

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 over alternatives. The sibling list includes many Bing-related tools, but the description offers no hints about scenarios or exclusions.

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