Crawl a running site and scan multiple pages

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

Describes crawling strategy (breadth-first, same-origin links, max pages) and audit behavior. With no annotations, the description covers key behavioral traits, though it omits potential error conditions or performance implications.

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?

Three concise sentences, no redundant words, and key information is front-loaded. Every sentence contributes value.

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?

For a complex tool with 10 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains what it does and when to use it, but lacks details about the return format (e.g., structure of the aggregated report). Sibling tools are noted but not directly compared.

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%; each parameter already has a description. The overall description adds minimal extra meaning (e.g., 'breadth-first') beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states it crawls a site breadth-first, runs axe-core audits on each page, and returns aggregated plus per-page results. Distinguishes from siblings by focusing on whole-site scanning.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use to audit a whole site/app in one call instead of scanning routes one by one,' providing a clear when-to-use scenario. Could be improved by explicitly contrasting with single-page tools like scan_url.

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