Start/stop monitoring

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

Annotations already indicate destructive and open world. Description adds that it establishes schedule and history. Does not detail prerequisites, idempotency, or error behavior.

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?

Two sentences with no extraneous information. Front-loaded with core action.

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 toggle/monitoring start/stop tool, description covers purpose, usage, and relation to get_changes. Missing return value description but acceptable given no output schema.

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%, so baseline 3. Description does not add significant extra meaning beyond schema; it references start/stop which maps to the enabled 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 clearly states the tool starts or stops ongoing monitoring of a website's AI visibility. It uses specific verbs and distinguishes from siblings by contrasting with one-off checks and referencing get_changes as the consumer of the history.

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?

Provides explicit use cases: when someone wants to monitor/track/watch/alert over time. Contrasts with one-off checks. Does not explicitly list when not to use or alternative tools beyond get_changes.

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