fetch_api

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions making requests with 'various methods, headers, and body' but lacks critical details: it doesn't specify authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, response format, or side effects. For a general-purpose API tool with 7 parameters, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its 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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core functionality. Every word earns its place without redundancy or fluff, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 tool's complexity (7 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how errors are handled, or practical constraints like authentication. For a versatile API tool, more context is needed to use it effectively beyond the parameter definitions.

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 parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema—it mentions 'various methods, headers, and body' which are covered in the schema's enum and descriptions. No additional parameter semantics are provided, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose as making REST API requests with various methods, headers, and body. It specifies the verb ('Make a REST API request') and resource ('API endpoint'), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like fetch_webpage or download_file, which might have overlapping functionality for HTTP requests.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools like fetch_webpage or download_file, nor does it specify use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions. The agent must infer usage from the tool name and parameters alone.

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