Check AI visibility

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

Adds substantial context beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations: engines lacking an env API key are silently skipped, live web search is enabled, each question costs a few cents per engine billed by the provider. Cost and engine-skip behavior are exactly the operational traits an agent must know before spending money.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and outputs, then operational caveats (skipped engines, cost), then the two input modes. Dense but every sentence earns its place; the pricing sentence could be slightly tighter but the mode-switching examples are load-bearing.

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?

With no output schema, the description enumerates the reported fields, and it covers defaults, cost, skipped engines, and both input modes. Nothing needed to invoke this 6-parameter tool correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100% so the baseline is 3, but the description adds cross-field semantics the schema does not: questions and category+location are mutually exclusive modes, and omitting questions with a category yields exactly 5 generated questions. It does not explain the engines subset default beyond what the schema says.

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 first sentence states a specific verb (ask engines buyer questions) and enumerates the exact outputs: whether the business is named, its list position, website citation, competitors named, and source domains. An agent knows precisely what this tool does without opening the schema.

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?

Gives explicit selection logic between the two input modes — pass 1-10 questions, or omit them and pass category plus location to get 5 generic buyer questions. There are no sibling tools, so no alternative-tool routing is needed, but it omits any when-not-to-use case.

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