Find Websites By Slug

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

With readOnlyHint/openWorldHint already declaring the safety profile, the description still adds substantial behavioral context: return shape (compact WebsiteSummary vs full Website on expand), bounding (limit default 25 / max 100), truncation semantics (client scan stops at 500 records / 4 pages, RESOLUTION_TRUNCATED, 'never a partial answer'). This is well beyond what the annotations convey.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then routing guidance, then bounding constraints. Sentences are dense but every one carries signal; the parenthetical '(code, message, keyword, … dropped)' and some punctuation-heavy clauses add minor friction but no real waste.

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?

For a bounded singleton lookup with an output schema available, the description covers return cardinality, return shape variants, truncation behavior, and sibling routing. Given the output schema already documents return values, nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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 50%, and the description adds meaning to 'expand' by contrasting the compact WebsiteSummary return with the full Website. The slug parameter's exact-match semantics largely duplicate the schema text, and the nested 'opts' object is not fully elaborated, so it stops short of fully compensating for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb and resource with scope: 'Find one website by its URL slug.' It immediately implies the singleton lookup nature ('one website'), distinguishing it from the bulk siblings. An agent can tell what it returns and at what cardinality without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly positions itself against alternatives: 'Preferred over a full websites scan for a slug lookup' and then names the exclusions 'Do not use it to enumerate or to page... call hudu_search or hudu_get_website for that.' Both when-to-use and when-not-to-use with named fallbacks are present.

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