proj_airi_present_surface

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds that the URL is embedded in a sandbox iframe, which is useful security context. However, it does not disclose behavior for unsafe URLs, rate limits, or response format, so the added value is moderate.

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 two sentences long with no verbose or redundant phrases. It front-loads the core action and quickly provides context about the server contract, making it highly concise.

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 tool has 4 parameters (1 required) and no output schema, the description adequately covers the main purpose but fails to explain optional parameters or return values. It is minimally complete but not thorough.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It only explains the 'url' parameter as a safe http(s) URL, but completely omits the optional parameters 'title', 'summary', and 'mimeType', leaving their purpose unclear.

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 states the tool embeds a safe http(s) URL in an AIRI chat as a sandbox iframe, which is a specific verb+resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'present_preview', leaving ambiguity about which to use for similar tasks.

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 mentions it's a 'generic proj-airi envelope' and follows the same contract as other servers, implying a common pattern. But it provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it reference alternatives like 'present_preview'.

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