ASO Scan — measure your ASO Score

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

The description discloses that the tool performs 33 checks across multiple categories, and warns that include_artifacts returns untrusted content. However, it does not mention that it makes HTTP requests to the target, which could be useful for an agent to know.

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 paragraph that front-loads the purpose and then details the checks. It is concise but could be more scannable with bullet points. No 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?

Given no output schema, the description covers return values (ASO Score, maturity level, verdict, per-pillar scores, evidence, recommendations). It lists categories and notes the untrusted nature of artifacts. It is mostly complete, though it could mention result format or scan duration.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the description adds value beyond the schema by noting that include_artifacts returns untrusted content and explaining the categories parameter includes specific check categories. The schema already defines parameters clearly, but the description enriches safety context.

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 the tool scans a website for Agent Readiness using the ASO framework and returns a comprehensive report. It specifies the 33 checks and categories, distinguishing it from sibling tools like check_signal (single check) or get_aso_framework (framework info).

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?

The description explains what the tool does but does not explicitly state when to use it vs. alternatives like check_signal or get_fix_plan. Usage context is implied but not directly addressed.

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