motion.detect

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

Annotations already declare readOnly and idempotent, but description is misleading by only mentioning CSS parsing, while tool supports multiple detection modes (video, runtime, hybrid) and has network dependencies. Missing crucial behavioral traits like graceful degradation on timeout, dependency on Playwright for JS animation detection, and requirement for baseUrl when fetching external CSS. Description does not add value beyond annotations; it contradicts the full scope of the tool.

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, very concise and front-loaded with main purpose. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for extreme brevity, missing critical behavioral context. Still, structure is efficient.

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 tool complexity (19 params, multiple modes, no output schema), description is insufficient. Does not explain detection modes, required inputs (url vs html vs pageId), return format (list of patterns? warnings?), or side effects like saving to DB (save_to_db param). Agent cannot fully understand tool without reading all parameter descriptions.

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 is 3. Description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond 'CSS animations, transitions, keyframes' which only hints at detection_mode. Does not help agent understand parameter relationships or required inputs for different modes.

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 states 'Detect/classify motion patterns from web page' with specific mention of CSS animations, transitions, keyframes, and warnings. Clearly identifies the action and resource, but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like motion.search, which is implied by different verb.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Does not mention prerequisites, such as requiring a pageId or URL depending on detection_mode, nor any conditions for using different modes. Agent lacks context for appropriate invocation.

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