get_blog_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool's function but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether it's read-only (implied by 'get'), authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or what happens with invalid inputs. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and includes essential details (URL or ID). Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a simple input schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what information is returned (e.g., blog title, author, posts count), error cases, or behavioral context. For a tool in a server with multiple siblings, more guidance on output and usage would improve completeness.

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%, with the parameter 'blogUrl' documented as accepting 'Blog URL (e.g., myblog.blogspot.com) or Blog ID'. The description adds minimal value beyond this, only repeating that it accepts 'URL or ID'. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting, but no additional semantics are provided.

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 ('Get information') and resource ('about a blog'), specifying it can be done by 'URL or ID'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_blogs' (which lists multiple blogs) and 'get_post' (which gets post info). However, it doesn't specify what type of information is returned (e.g., metadata, settings, statistics).

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 usage when you need blog information and have either a URL or ID. It doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs. 'list_blogs' (for listing all blogs) or 'get_post' (for post details), nor does it mention prerequisites like authentication. The context is clear but lacks explicit alternatives or exclusions.

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