manus_website_status

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, or potential side effects. It only states what the tool does without addressing safety or restrictions.

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 sentence with no unnecessary words, front-loading the purpose and a key usage constraint. It is optimally concise for the information provided.

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 output schema, the description should more clearly specify the return format or structure. It mentions what is retrieved ('status, live URLs, visibility') but lacks details on output representation, pagination, or error conditions. Parameters are not fully documented.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description adds the constraint 'exactly one of task_id or website_id', which provides some semantic guidance beyond the schema's titles. However, it does not explain the source or format of these identifiers.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'website's publish status, live URLs, and visibility', making the purpose specific. It distinguishes from siblings like manus_website_publish which writes, and manus_website_list_checkpoints which lists historical snapshots.

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 includes a guideline to 'Provide exactly one of task_id or website_id', which helps with parameter selection. However, it does not provide advice on when to use this tool versus alternatives like manus_website_publish or manus_website_list_checkpoints.

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