audit_axe

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

Mentions 'in-process engine' and 'WCAG 2.2 rule tags', and specifies mutual exclusivity of three parameters. With no annotations, additional details like non-destructive nature, error handling, or speed are missing.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose and constraints. No 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?

Covers core purpose and main constraint, but leaves gaps on two parameters and the nature of 'GOV.UK checks'. Output schema exists, so return values are covered.

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?

Adds meaning for url, html, session_id (mutually exclusive), but level and include_best_practice are unexplained. Schema coverage is 0%, so description partially compensates.

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 it audits with axe-core engine plus GOV.UK checks, distinguishing it from sibling tools like audit_ibm and audit_lighthouse. However, it does not explicitly say 'use this for axe-based audits'.

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 explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives. 'Audit with the axe-core engine only' implies a specific engine, but no contrast with other audit tools.

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