inspect_url_enhanced

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for disclosing behavior. It only states the tool's purpose and parameter scoping, but omits any side effects, return value structure, required permissions, or rate limits. The domain-property note is a useful scoping behavior, but it's more about parameter semantics than overall behavioral transparency.

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 concise and front-loaded: a one-sentence purpose followed by focused parameter documentation. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant or filler content.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. The description covers the key usage context, including how to obtain site_url from list_properties and the domain-property behavior. However, it lacks a clear distinction from similar sibling tools, which would make it fully complete in context.

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?

The schema has zero parameter descriptions, so the description must compensate. It does so effectively by explaining site_url with examples and domain-property behavior, and page_url with a clear definition. This goes well beyond the bare schema, though it stops short of giving full syntax or formatting rules for all edge cases.

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 tool 'check[s] indexing status and rich results' for a URL, giving a specific verb and resource. However, it doesn't distinguish this enhanced tool from sibling tools like batch_url_inspection or check_indexing_issues, so the differentiation is weak.

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 provides detailed parameter usage (site_url format, domain property scope) but gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like batch_url_inspection or check_indexing_issues. The 'Enhanced' label implies a niche, but no explicit when/when-not guidance is provided.

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