hosting_listWebsitesV1

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses pagination, source (own and shared accounts), and filterability. However, it does not describe response structure, limits, or potential side effects. For a read-only list tool, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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 three sentences with the key action and scope upfront. Every sentence adds value: retrieval, source, and filtering. No fluff or 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?

Description covers source (own and shared accounts), pagination, and filtering. Missing: response structure (no output schema), typical usage examples, or implicit constraints. For a 6-parameter list tool with no output schema, it is moderately complete but could be more helpful.

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?

Input schema covers all 6 parameters with individual descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds 'Use the available query parameters to filter results...' which groups them but adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Retrieve a paginated list of websites (main and addon types) accessible to the authenticated client.' It specifies the verb (retrieve), resource (list of websites), and scope (paginated, types, accessible client). This distinguishes it from siblings like hosting_listOrdersV1 or hosting_listAccountCronJobs.

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 advises using query parameters for filtering, providing explicit context for targeted use. While it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use or contrast with alternatives, the distinct sibling tool names and the clear purpose make usage intuitive.

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