prufa_run_discovery

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

Describes start of discovery, return object fields, idempotency_key behavior, and error conditions. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Could mention limits on concurrent discoveries.

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?

Two sentences with essential details, front-loaded with purpose. No fluff, every sentence earns its place.

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?

Covers return fields, prerequisites, errors, and polling. Missing details like polling interval or status values, but output schema is absent so description compensates.

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% (only idempotency_key has schema description). Description adds meaning: url is target, idempotency_key for retry safety. Without description, url's purpose would be vague.

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?

Description clearly states it starts a full-auto discovery run on a URL, crawls site, infers user flows, and drafts them. It distinguishes from sibling tools like prufa_get_discovery (polling) and prufa_authorize_domain (domain setup).

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?

Explicit prerequisites (paid/trial tier, verified domain) and error handling (403, 404), plus polling instruction (prufa_get_discovery). Could be improved by explicitly stating when not to use (e.g., use prufa_run_audit for other purposes).

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