dompruner_analyze

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states what is returned (report, counts, anchors) but does not disclose whether the tool fetches the URL, side effects, rate limits, or error behaviors. It is non-misleading but incomplete.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the primary action and key output metrics. No filler words; every element contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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?

The tool is simple (one param, no output schema), and the description adequately covers the return content (render type, token counts, anchors). It lacks context about error handling or prerequisites (e.g., valid URL), but is sufficiently complete for a basic analysis tool.

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% (single 'url' parameter described as 'URL to analyze'). The description adds no further param semantics beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies per the rubric.

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 it returns a token-reduction analysis report for a URL, listing specific output elements (render type, token counts, Semantic Anchors). This clearly distinguishes it from a generic fetch tool, though it does not explicitly name the sibling.

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?

Usage is implied: use this to get a token-reduction analysis report for a URL. No explicit alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, but the sibling name 'dompruner_fetch' strongly suggests a different purpose. There is no guidance on when to choose one over the other.

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