Get a prioritized ASO fix plan

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It implies read-only scanning but doesn't explicitly state lack of side effects, required permissions, or response format limitations. Adequate but lacks explicit behavioral disclosure.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and outputs; second sentence provides usage guidance. Concise with no unnecessary words. Could be split for readability but overall efficient.

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 1 parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description explains the tool's outputs and differentiates from siblings. It provides enough context for correct invocation, though lacks details on return structure (since no output schema).

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% (1 parameter). Description adds minimal enrichment beyond schema: 'Website URL or domain to plan fixes for' is similar to schema description. Does not add format, validation, or usage nuances.

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?

Clear verb 'Scan a site' and resource 'prioritized remediation plan' with specific outputs listed (signals, points, templates). Distinguishes from siblings by stating when to use each.

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 tells when to use this tool ('when user wants an implementation roadmap') and when to use siblings 'scan_site' and 'check_signal', providing clear decision context.

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