seo_heading_analysis

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, and it explicitly describes the analytical behavior and the checks performed (hierarchy, H1 usage, accessibility). It clearly implies a read-only operation, and no contradiction or hidden mutation is suggested.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the primary action and then gives specific analysis dimensions. No filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail is present.

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 simple one-parameter read-only analyzer with no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and what it considers. It does not describe the return format or failure conditions, but the low complexity keeps those gaps minor.

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 has 100% coverage for the single 'url' parameter, so the baseline applies. The description adds little beyond the schema except that the URL is the target of the heading analysis, which is already evident from the parameter name and 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 states a specific verb ('Analyzes') and resource ('heading structure (H1-H6)') and names concrete analysis dimensions: hierarchy, H1 usage, and accessibility. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling SEO tools like seo_meta_analyze or seo_robots_analyze.

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 makes the tool's scope clear enough that an agent can infer when to select it: whenever heading structure or H1 usage needs SEO review. It does not explicitly mention alternative tools or exclusions, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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