check_http3

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

No annotations provided, so description fully carries behavioral disclosure. States read-only, no auth, estimated 2-5s timeout. Details three combined signals and aggregate boolean return. No contradictions.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, efficient and no redundant information. Every sentence adds 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?

Given low complexity (one param, no output schema), description covers purpose, method, use cases, timing, and return structure. Complete for agent decision-making.

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% for the single parameter 'domain' with clear description. The tool description adds no further parameter meaning beyond schema, but implies domain usage. Baseline 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?

The description clearly states it checks HTTP/3 and QUIC support for a domain, with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling check tools by focusing on modern transport protocol, not email security or DNS.

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 mentions use cases: validating CDN/Cloudflare HTTP/3 rollouts or auditing modern transport posture. Also says not relevant for mail-only domains. Lacks explicit alternative tool names but context is clear.

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