detect-ad-pixels

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral transparency. It only mentions focusing on advertising platforms, which hints at scope but does not disclose what the tool returns, whether it performs any analysis, or how it behaves in edge cases (e.g., no pixels found). No details about output, side effects, or requirements are provided.

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 at one sentence with no wasted words, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently concise. It lacks important details that would make the sentence informative, so while brevity is good, the content is too thin to be considered well-structured.

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's purpose (detecting ad pixels), the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the output looks like, what constitutes an ad pixel, or how the tool handles the URL. Even with a simple schema, the lack of behavioral context makes it insufficient for an agent to correctly invoke and interpret the tool.

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 provides 100% coverage for both 'url' and 'waitTime' parameters with clear descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning. Since schema coverage is high, the baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description does not need to compensate, but it also does not enrich the parameters.

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 says to 'Focus on advertising platforms (Facebook, TikTok, etc.) on a webpage', but it lacks a specific verb like 'detect' or 'find'. The tool name suggests detection, but the description is vague about the actual action, making it ambiguous whether it analyzes, lists, or reports. It does identify the resource (advertising platforms) and distinguishes from siblings by scope, but the verb 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like 'find-marketing-technologies' or 'analyze-analytics-platforms'. The description gives no context about prerequisites, situations, or exclusions, leaving the agent without clear decision criteria.

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