add-accessibility

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

No annotations are present, and the description fails to disclose behavioral traits. It inconsistently suggests both retrieving instructions and performing an accessibility test, without clarifying actual side effects or return behavior.

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 short but poorly structured: it starts with an alarming warning and mixes two distinct intents. It is not front-loaded or concise, wasting space on a misleading instruction.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should fully describe the tool's function. It fails to resolve the contradiction between retrieving instructions and adding accessibility, leaving the agent uncertain about outcomes.

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 has zero parameters and 100% coverage, so no additional parameter documentation is required. The description does not add value beyond the schema but does not detract either.

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 starts with an imperative 'CALL THIS TOOL IMMEDIATELY to get full workflow instructions,' which contradicts the title and the subsequent mention of 'Add accessibility testing.' The primary purpose is unclear, as it conflates retrieving instructions with performing an action.

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 its siblings (e.g., add-api-testing, advanced-optimization). The description does not specify context, prerequisites, or alternatives.

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