Scan a whole site

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

Adds substantial context beyond the annotations: one credit per page, the budget cap interacting with remaining credits, a 25-page OAuth ceiling that max_pages overrides, immediate (async) return, and the required 'site:analyze' scope for API-key auth. Annotations only cover the safety profile; the description carries the cost, auth, and limit behavior an agent needs.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and most sentences carry real information, but the middle clause about the plan cap and credits is compressed to the point of ambiguity ('the smaller wins'), costing some readability.

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?

Cost, auth scope, page cap, and async return are all covered, which is the hard part for a bulk-scan starter. However, with no output schema the description never says what it returns (e.g., a run identifier) or how to follow up via check_status, leaving the post-call workflow unaddressed.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description adds rationale for max_pages (it lifts the OAuth 25-page default cap) but says nothing about include/exclude, whose semantics and ordering live entirely in the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Start a site-wide analysis') plus the scope that separates it from a single-page tool: it picks its own pages rather than accepting a URL list. An agent can identify this as the site-wide crawl variant 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?

Explains the page-selection heuristic (homepage first, then high-coverage sections) and the cost implication, which tells the agent when this is worth calling. It gives clear context but does not explicitly name a sibling like analyze_website as the single-page alternative or state when not to use it.

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