get_website

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but the description says nothing about permissions, error behavior when an ID is missing, or what the response contains.

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?

The description is a single short sentence with no waste and is front-loaded. Its brevity is appropriate, though it errs toward under-specification rather than over-explanation.

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 read tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented required parameter, the description is too sparse. An agent lacks enough context to know what details are returned or how to correctly identify a website.

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?

The single required parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does not mention the id argument or clarify that it is a website identifier, leaving the parameter's meaning entirely implicit from the schema type.

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 states a clear verb (Get) and resource (website), distinguishing it from list_websites and mutation siblings like update_website. However, it does not specify what 'details' includes or how it relates to list_websites, so sibling differentiation is only implicit.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus list_websites or get_website_ssl. The agent receives no explicit conditions, prerequisites, or alternatives.

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