Check Website Hosting Readiness

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

Annotations already declare safe read-only/idempotent behavior. Description adds meaningful scope context ('fixed facts') and exclusion of sensitive internals, reinforcing what the operation covers and avoids. No contradiction found.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the action verb, and every clause earns its place. The negative scope clarifies without verbosity.

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?

With zero parameters, strong annotations (readOnly/idempotent), and an output schema present, the description fully covers the tool's purpose and boundaries. No additional information is necessary.

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?

Tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100% by default. Description correctly avoids inventing parameter details; no parameter explanation needed.

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 uses specific verb 'Inspect' with clear resource 'website-hosting readiness facts'. Explicitly distinguishes from siblings by stating it does NOT read Nginx config, process arguments, or private connection values, separating it from diagnostics tools.

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?

Usage is implied rather than explicit. The negative constraints hint when NOT to use (if Nginx config contents, process args, or private values are needed), but no alternative tools are named or explicit when-to-use guidance provided.

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