Inspect an API without saving an adapter

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. Description adds that it makes outbound HTTP(S) requests and may call LLM for REST heuristic, noting nothing is persisted. No contradiction, and adds useful context beyond annotations.

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?

Concise but thorough: a clear opening sentence, side effects, read-only guarantee, and usage guidance. Every sentence adds value without redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given two parameters (one nested object), the description fully covers purpose, behavior, side effects, usage distinction, and parameter details. Output schema exists, so return values need not be described.

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%. Description explains url as base URL to inspect and credentials as optional secrets stored encrypted, with examples of accepted formats (api_key, token, username/password), adding clarity beyond the schema.

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 tool inspects an API's shape without saving an adapter, listing specific outputs (service name, discovery method, auth type, endpoint list) and clearly distinguishes from liquid_connect.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('preview an unknown API') and when to use liquid_connect instead ('when ready to actually read data'), providing clear alternatives and context.

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