Select Site

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

The description mentions validation but does not explain what validation entails (e.g., connectivity check, verification of Discourse instance). With no annotations, the description should be more explicit about side effects and safety. The tool appears to be a safe read operation, but that is not stated.

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?

One concise sentence that effectively communicates the tool's purpose and output. No wasted words, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but could be improved by detailing the validation behavior and the exact structure of the returned JSON. It meets the minimum viability threshold.

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 coverage is 100%, and the schema already describes the 'site' parameter as a base URL. The description adds little beyond what the schema provides, so a 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 explicitly states the action (validate and select), the resource (Discourse site), and the output (JSON with site URL and title). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like discourse_search or discourse_read_topic, which have different purposes.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It would help to indicate that it should be used first to establish a site context before other Discourse operations.

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