Get alias creation options

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context beyond that: it enumerates the returned fields and the workflow dependency on alias_create_custom. It does not mention auth requirements or rate limits, but for a read-only options endpoint that is a minor omission.

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 front-loads the purpose, then lists the return contents and the downstream requirement in order of importance. No filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description must carry the return-value burden, and it does by naming can_create, the prefix suggestion, and suffixes with signed_suffix. Combined with the annotation-declared safety profile, an agent has enough to call it correctly; only auth/error behavior is unaddressed.

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?

There is a single optional hostname parameter and schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents it. The description repeats its purpose ('Pass the target website hostname to tailor the suggestion') but adds no format, default, or syntax detail beyond the schema. Baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Fetch the options needed to create a custom alias') and enumerates exactly what comes back: can_create, a prefix suggestion, and suffixes with signed_suffix. This clearly separates it from sibling creation tools like alias_create_custom, which it explicitly references.

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?

Positions the tool as the prerequisite step for alias_create_custom by noting the signed_suffix is 'required by alias_create_custom', and tells the caller to pass the target hostname. It gives clear usage context but names no when-not condition or alternative for retrieving alias options.

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