lighthouse_audit

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the tool performs an audit but doesn't describe side effects, permissions needed, or output behavior. It fails to provide essential transparency beyond the name.

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, which is concise but underspecified. It sacrifices clarity for brevity and does not front-load key information. Adequate but not 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 complexity of Lighthouse audits (multiple categories, mobile simulation, throttling) and the absence of an output schema, the description should explain return values or behavior. It provides no such context, leaving the agent underinformed.

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?

All 4 parameters have descriptions in the schema, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning; it is too brief to enrich parameter understanding. Baseline score of 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?

The description mentions 'Lighthouse quality audit, SEO, accessibility', which clearly identifies the resource (Lighthouse) and the action (audit). However, it lacks explicit differentiation from sibling tools, though no other sibling is a Lighthouse tool, so it's implicitly distinct.

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, nor any prerequisites or when-not-to-use conditions. The description is purely declarative and lacks contextual usage advice.

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