analyze_website

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses crawling behavior (homepage + up to 4 additional pages), extraction of text and business details, and output format. This provides good behavioral insight, though it doesn't mention potential issues like login walls or rate limits.

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 three sentences, concise, and front-loaded with the primary action. Every sentence adds value—crawl scope, extracted details, and output summary. No wasted words.

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 single parameter, lack of output schema, and no siblings, the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, how it behaves (crawling strategy), and what it returns, covering all necessary contextual information for an agent.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage with a clear description of the 'url' parameter. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema states, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Fetches and analyzes a website') and the purpose ('to extract business context'), with specific details about crawling up to 5 pages and extracting content types. No siblings exist, so no differentiation needed.

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 for analyzing websites to get business context, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Since no sibling tools exist, the lack of alternatives is acceptable, but it doesn't address when not to use it.

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