monitor_diff

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

Discloses that unpaid calls return x402 payment terms, but lacks other behavioral details like read-only nature, caching, or effects of providing hash vs text. No annotations to assist.

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?

Concise paragraph of ~60 words, front-loads the main action, and each sentence adds value. No unnecessary repetition or fluff.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema and 5 parameters, the description covers purpose, usage, and payment behavior. It could mention behavior when no previous state is given, but overall is fairly 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 coverage is 100% so baseline is 3. Description adds minimal extra meaning, only the payment caveat for payment-related params. It does not significantly enhance understanding beyond schema.

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 verb 'check' and resource 'whether a page changed', with specific use cases like monitoring docs and pricing pages. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools which are about extraction, research, and search.

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 says 'Use this for lightweight monitoring...' and notes the payment requirement. Provides clear context but does not explicitly list cases to avoid or compare with siblings.

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