scan-marketing-stack

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether the webpage is loaded or rendered, side effects, timeouts, or limitations. This is insufficient for a scanning tool that likely interacts with a live page.

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 sentence, front-loaded with 'Comprehensive analysis,' and contains no redundant or filler words. It is appropriately sized for the minimal information it conveys.

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 is too minimal for a tool with two parameters and no output schema. It does not explain the output format, the scope of 'marketing and analytics technologies,' or how this scan differs from the many sibling tools, leaving significant gaps for an agent to decide and invoke the tool correctly.

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 input schema provides 100% description coverage for both parameters (url and waitTime), so the description does not need to add parameter details. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, which matches the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 performs a comprehensive analysis of marketing and analytics technologies on a webpage. The verb 'analysis' and resource are specific, but it doesn't explicitly distinguish from very similar sibling tools like find-marketing-technologies, so purpose lacks clear differentiation.

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 alternatives such as detect-ad-pixels or identify-tag-managers. The description only states what it does, not when it is the preferred choice or any exclusions.

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