check_links

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

The description discloses that it sends HEAD requests and warns about potential time consumption. Since no annotations are present, the description carries the full burden, and it adequately covers the key behavioral traits (non-destructive, network-intensive).

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, front-loaded with the main action, followed by behavioral details. No wasted words or redundancy.

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 tool with no parameters and an output schema, the description covers the core purpose, method, and performance impact. It is complete enough for an agent to understand usage without needing additional context.

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 tool has no parameters, so the schema coverage is 100% by default. The description does not need to add parameter details, and the baseline for 0 parameters is 4.

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 crawls all internal links on the current page and checks for dead links (404/5xx). This distinguishes it from siblings like check_performance (performance metrics) and crawl_site (multi-page crawling).

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 provides some context by noting the operation can take several seconds, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. No comparison with sibling tools is provided.

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