agent_card_well_known_url

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. It discloses that the tool computes a URL without side effects, but lacks details on permissions, error behavior, or return format beyond the implied URL string.

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 concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and the URL convention, with no redundancy or unnecessary words.

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?

The description adequately explains the tool's function given its simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema). It implies the return value is a URL, but could explicitly state the output format for completeness.

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 explains how origin and agent_id combine to form the URL, adding context beyond the schema's type definitions. However, it does not specify constraints like valid URI format for origin.

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?

Description clearly states it computes the canonical Agent Card well-known URL for a given origin and agent_id, with the specific URL convention provided. This distinguishes it from sibling tools for other card types.

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 usage for constructing Agent Card URLs, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like tool_card_well_known_url or aup_well_known_url.

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