Endpoint Discovery

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

Discloses that archive queries cost nothing to the program and that enabling include_crawl actively touches the target. This goes beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by detailing the conditional side effect.

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?

Description is compact and well-structured, with the core purpose first and the important caveat about include_crawl clearly separated. No redundant wording.

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?

Covers purpose, sources, and side-effect tradeoffs sufficiently for an agent to decide when to invoke it. Since an output schema exists, omitting return details is acceptable; slightly more detail on expected target format could improve completeness.

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?

Describes include_crawl's behavior and explicitly states target is a domain, compensating for the schema's lack of parameter descriptions. The target parameter is clear from context, though format expectations could be slightly more explicit.

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?

States clearly it collects known URLs for a domain from public archives, with a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes itself from active scanning siblings by emphasizing archive sources.

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 explains that the default behavior queries archives and does not touch the target, while include_crawl adds a shallow katana crawl that does. This gives concrete guidance on when to enable the optional parameter.

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