URL Health Check

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It adds important behavioral context by stating 'This is an async operation that polls until complete,' which goes beyond the schema. However, it does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., generating edge requests), rate limits, or the nature of the returned result, leaving some behavior opaque.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and a key behavioral note. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or irrelevant detail.

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?

For a tool with 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what the health check returns, how to retrieve the async result, or how to interpret the variety of options. The schema covers parameter definitions, but the overall behavior and result format remain unclear, making it difficult for an agent to use correctly.

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%, and the schema already provides detailed explanations for all 10 parameters. The tool description only mentions cURL, dig, and MTR, which aligns with the viewsAllowed parameter but adds no new semantic value beyond what the schema already offers.

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 tool 'runs a comprehensive health check on a URL from the Akamai edge' and specifies the combination of cURL, dig, and optionally MTR. This distinguishes it from the sibling tools (curl_from_edge, dig_from_edge, mtr_from_edge) which handle individual diagnostics.

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 using this tool for a comprehensive health check, but it does not explicitly say when to use it instead of the more specific sibling tools, nor does it provide exclusions or guidance on choosing between them. This leaves the agent to infer the appropriate context.

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