Set default site

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It discloses persistence across restarts and mentions 'config.json', which implies a file write. However, it does not discuss authentication requirements, overwrite behavior, or error conditions, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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, no wasted words. The most important information (persistence, when to use) is front-loaded, and the parameter clarification is concise yet thorough.

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 the simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the core purpose, usage scenario, and parameter details. It does not describe return values or error handling, but these are not critical for this tool's context.

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?

The schema already covers 100% of the parameter, but the description adds significant value by explaining the two formats (URL-prefix vs. domain property) and that an alias or omission is possible. This goes beyond the schema's minimal description.

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 action ('Persist the default property'), the resource ('config.json'), and the context ('survives restarts', 'when a call omits siteUrl and no session site is set'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like use_site by specifying persistence across restarts.

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 explicitly defines when to use the tool (when siteUrl is omitted and no session site set) and what it accepts (URL or alias). However, it does not mention when NOT to use it or explicitly point to alternatives like use_site for session-level changes, leaving some room for misinterpretation.

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