spec_info

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

No annotations provided, but description discloses caching (15 min, stale fallback) and supported URL schemes. Does not explicitly state read-only nature but implies it.

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?

One sentence with embedded details; front-loaded with purpose. Slightly long but well-structured and efficient.

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?

Output schema exists so return values not needed. Description covers the single parameter thoroughly. Missing error handling details but sufficient for usage.

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 0%, but description fully explains the spec_path parameter (string for local, object with url and optional headers). Adds concrete semantics beyond the minimal 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?

Clearly states the tool summarizes an OpenAPI spec from local path or URL. Distinguishes from siblings (spec_get, spec_list) by focusing on summarization.

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?

Provides clear usage context: remote specs via {url, headers}, caching, URL constraints. Does not explicitly differentiate from siblings but offers enough guidance.

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