exclude_my_ip

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

Although there are no annotations, the description explains the behavioral consequences (prevents user's visits from being tracked) and the prerequisite (per site). It could mention side effects or reversibility, but for a simple configuration action, this is sufficient.

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 concise with four sentences, each adding distinct value: purpose, effect, usage guidance for different agents, and per-site requirement. It is front-loaded with the primary action.

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 simplicity of the tool, the description covers all necessary context: what it does, what prerequisite is needed (IP detection), and that it must be done per site. No output schema is needed, and the parameter descriptions are adequate.

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 schema already describes both parameters (site, ip_address) with 100% coverage. The description adds valuable context: 'If omitted, uses the request's origin IP (only works from local MCP)'. This clarifies an important behavior not inferable from the schema alone.

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's action ('Exclude an IP address from analytics tracking for a site') and its purpose ('Prevents the user's own visits from appearing in the data'). This is specific and distinct from any sibling tools, which are mainly for retrieving analytics data or managing sites, not excluding IPs.

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 provides explicit instructions for different agent types: in Claude Code, detect IP with curl; in conversation agents, ask the user to check their IP. It also clarifies that the operation must be done per site. This clearly guides when and how to use the tool.

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