submit_url

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It states the action is 'submit for indexing' which implies a write operation, but doesn't disclose permissions needed, rate limits, whether the submission is synchronous/asynchronous, or what happens if the URL is already indexed. This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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 a single, efficient sentence that gets straight to the point with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool and front-loads the essential information.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and two required parameters, the description is insufficient. While an output schema exists (which helps), the description doesn't address key behavioral aspects like what 'indexing' entails, success/failure conditions, or how this differs from similar tools in the context.

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 0%, so the description must compensate but provides no parameter information. It doesn't explain what 'site_url' versus 'url' parameters represent, their relationship, format requirements, or examples. With two required parameters completely undocumented, this is inadequate.

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 action ('submit') and resource ('a single URL for indexing'), making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'submit_url_batch' by specifying 'single URL', but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other submission tools like 'submit_content' or 'submit_sitemap'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention sibling tools like 'submit_url_batch' for multiple URLs, 'fetch_url' for retrieval, or 'submit_content' for other submission types, leaving the agent without contextual usage instructions.

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