Resolve Polarion URL

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

Adds context beyond readOnlyHint=true: default behavior returns only identifiers, while `fetch` triggers a follow-on call to the matching get tool and returns the full entity response. The same-host constraint is disclosed as a precondition. It does not say what happens for an unrecognized or malformed URL, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with what is parsed and what is returned, then the fetch modifier, then the routing rule. No filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully states what comes back (identifiers, optionally plus the entity response) and the host precondition. The exact shape of the 'identifiers' (project/space/id fields) is not described, a minor gap for a parsing tool.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented in structured form, and the description largely restates them (fetch = also call the get tool, url must be same host). It reinforces the default-vs-opt-in behavior but adds little syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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 ('Parses') and resource ('Polarion UI URL') and enumerates exactly which entity kinds it yields identifiers for (Work Item, LiveDoc, Rich Page, Test Run, Plan). This clearly separates it from the many get*/patch* siblings that take IDs rather than URLs.

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 states when to use it ('when the input is a UI link') and when not to ('call the resource get tool directly when IDs are already known'), plus the host prerequisite. Alternatives and the selection condition are both named.

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