Check E-Hentai access

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying exactly which access-related states are diagnosed (reachability, auth state, Cloudflare challenge), going beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action ('Diagnose') and then lists the three diagnostic domains. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose, with no filler or repetition.

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 simple, optional-parameter, read-only diagnostic tool with rich annotations, the description is nearly complete. The only notable gap is that it does not describe the return format or result structure, but the tool's purpose and safety profile are clear enough for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%: the 'site' parameter is fully documented with an enum and a clear description. The tool description itself adds no additional parameter meaning, which matches the baseline for a fully covered simple schema. Minor note: the schema's mention of 'URL override' does not correspond to any visible URL 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 immediately identifies the tool as a diagnostic action ('Diagnose') with a specific resource scope: reachability, authentication state, and Cloudflare challenge state for E-Hentai or ExHentai. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling gallery/favorite/search tools, which are all data-retrieval or management operations.

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 implies the tool is for diagnosing access issues but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose it over sibling tools or when not to use it. There is no mention of alternative tools or conditions that would make another tool more appropriate.

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