seo_audit

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool fetches and audits a page, and that no Google credentials are needed. However, it doesn't mention rate limits, whether the audit is synchronous, what happens with non-public or unreachable pages, or any side effects. For a read-only audit tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that states the action, resource, and key constraint. Every word earns its place; no filler or repetition of schema details.

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?

The tool has one parameter, a 100% schema description, and an output schema, so the description doesn't need to explain return values. The main missing context is behavioral details like timeout or error handling, but for a simple single-URL audit tool, the description is largely complete.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single parameter 'url' is already described as 'Public page URL to audit'. The description adds the 'without Google credentials' context but doesn't add new parameter-level 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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch and audit') with a clear resource ('a web page's on-page SEO') and adds a key differentiator ('without Google credentials'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like audit_site, inspect_url, and pagespeed, which require or imply different scopes or credential setups.

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 phrase 'without Google credentials' clearly signals when to use this tool over credential-requiring siblings like search_analytics or inspect_url. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for an agent to route correctly.

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