Get website

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

The description adds context by listing returned fields, but annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so no behavioral traits beyond that are disclosed. The description could mention that the tool does not modify data, but annotations already cover the safety profile.

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 a single, focused sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose and specific fields returned, making it easy for an agent to quickly understand.

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 simple single-parameter input, read-only annotation, and existence of an output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does. It lists the returned fields, which complements the output schema. A small improvement could be clarity on requiring an existing website ID, but the schema already implies that.

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 100%, and the description does not add additional meaning to the 'websiteId' parameter beyond what the schema provides. The schema's description already tells the agent to obtain the UUID from list_websites, so the tool description adds no extra value.

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 it fetches one website's metadata, listing specific fields (name, domain, share settings, createdAt), and distinguishes from sibling tools like list_websites. The verb 'Fetch' and resource 'one website's metadata' are precise and unambiguous.

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 implies use when you need a single website's details by ID, but it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, such as search or list tools for broader queries. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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