check_links

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It does mention the cost via x402, which is useful, but it never explains what the tool does, what kind of network interaction occurs, or what the output looks like.

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 very short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. It omits critical information and does not earn its place beyond the cost note.

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, no annotations, and a generic parameter container, the description should provide substantial guidance but does not. It is nearly useless for an agent to select or invoke the tool correctly.

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 only has a generic 'params' object with a placeholder description. The tool description does not list any specific parameters, so an agent has no idea what keys to provide (e.g., URL, list of links, timeout).

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 repeats the tool name ('check links') and adds a broad category label ('Security & Network tool'), but does not specify what 'checking links' actually does. It does not distinguish itself from siblings like dns_lookup or check_ssl_certificate.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any use cases, prerequisites, or related tools.

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