get_discovery_metadata

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It fails to disclose important behaviors such as rate limits, response format, or whether the tool is purely read-only. The word 'Free' only hints at no cost but is vague.

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 sentence that conveys the entire purpose efficiently. It is front-loaded with the verb 'Fetch' and lists the specific resources. No wasted words.

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 the absence of an output schema and annotations, the description should ideally hint at the response structure or usage context. It falls short by not mentioning what the metadata looks like or if it's suitable as a preliminary step for other tools. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so schema description coverage is effectively 100%. The description confirms the tool requires no parameters and is free, which adds context beyond the schema. However, no parameter details are needed, so this is adequate.

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 it fetches public discovery metadata from specific sources (index.json, llms.txt, openapi.json, x402 well-known metadata), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_api_status or inspect_x402_challenge that target different endpoints.

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 mentions 'Free', implying no authentication is needed, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it provide preconditions or exclusions. Since there are no parameters, the guidance is minimal but not misleading.

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