analyze_accessibility

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only states 'returns specific violations and suggestions,' which is minimal. Does not disclose side effects, performance, or other traits beyond basic read-like behavior.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff, front-loaded with tool purpose. Every sentence adds value without 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?

No output schema, yet description only vaguely mentions 'returns specific violations and suggestions.' Missing details about scope of violations, format, or examples. Adequate for simple tool but incomplete for rich understanding.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema (e.g., 'HTML or JSX markup' and 'WCAG conformance level' are already in schema). Baseline score of 3 for adequate but not enhanced semantics.

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?

Clearly states verb ('analyze'), resource ('HTML/JSX code'), and purpose ('accessibility issues based on WCAG guidelines'). Distinguishes from siblings like check_contrast or generate_accessibility_report by focusing on broad analysis rather than specific aspects.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings (e.g., check_contrast for specific checks, generate_accessibility_report for output). The purpose is implied but not contextualized.

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