site.discover

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false). The description adds the scoping behavior 'No unrelated website schemas are returned' plus the three output modes, which is useful context beyond annotations. It doesn't cover pagination (limit/offset) or result ordering, so it's not richer than a 3.

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, front-loaded with purpose then mode behavior. The 'No unrelated website schemas are returned' clause is a deliberate scoping guarantee that earns its place.

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?

No output schema, so the description should carry return-value information; it names the three conceptual return shapes (compact catalog, matching schemas, one exact schema), which is helpful. But pagination and two parameters are unexplained, and the sibling routing is missing, leaving notable gaps for a 6-param discovery tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the meaning of 'site', 'query', and 'operation' through the mode combinations (site alone, site+query, site+operation). It leaves 'url', 'limit', and 'offset' undocumented, but is otherwise the only source of parameter meaning.

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?

States a specific verb (Discover) and resource (installed sites / relevant operations), and explains the output varies by combination. It doesn't directly differentiate from siblings site.context and site.execute, so it falls short of a 5.

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 when each mode is used (site alone = catalog, site+query = matching schemas, site+operation = exact schema), which gives implied usage. However, it never names the alternatives (site.context, site.execute) or states when to use this versus them.

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