Batch Inspect URLs

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint=true annotation, the description discloses a concrete rate limit (2,000/day), a per-call cap (100 URLs), and the nature of the return data (summary with issues highlighted). It also adds a crucial behavioral instruction: base analysis only on returned data, report exact numbers, and do not speculate. This meaningfully enriches what annotations alone provide.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by limits and a high-value analysis directive. The IMPORTANT block, while emphatic, earns its place because it shapes agent behavior on a data-querying tool. Every sentence contributes.

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 two-parameter, batch read tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it states what the tool does, what it returns, its rate and size limits, and how the agent should handle the returned data. It also benefits from schema coverage for parameter details, so nothing essential 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 description coverage is 100%, with both urls and siteUrl already documented in the input schema. The description does not add substantial new parameter-level meaning beyond what schema provides; it only restates the max 100 URLs constraint that is already visible in maxItems. Baseline 3 is therefore 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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Inspect multiple URLs at once') and distinguishes it from the single-URL sibling tool by emphasizing batch operation. It also states the output ('summary of index status across all URLs with issues highlighted'), making the tool's purpose unmistakable.

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 description clearly signals when to use this tool: when inspecting multiple URLs at once. It also gives operational guardrails (max 100 URLs per call, rate limit). However, it does not explicitly name the alternative inspect_url or state 'for a single URL, use inspect_url instead,' so it stops short of a full when-not/exclusion statement.

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