voog_list_my_sites

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

Discloses key behavioral traits: token is site-scoped so array always length 1; token= exposes token in logs; host overrides for private domains. Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and description adds valuable context without contradiction.

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?

Single dense paragraph with front-loaded endpoint and return type. Every sentence provides necessary information: endpoint, return fields, site-scoping, token sourcing, host override, read-only nature. No wasted words.

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 3 parameters, the description fully explains functionality, return format, edge cases (single site), and parameter usage. Complete for an agent to correctly select and invoke.

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 three parameters are described in schema (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. Description adds security context (prefer token_env, token exposure risk, host validation) but doesn't introduce new parameters or override schema. Slight improvement over schema alone.

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 it probes `GET /admin/api/me/sites` to discover account metadata for a Voog token, returning specific fields like name, primary_domain, feature_flags. It distinguishes from sibling 'voog_list_sites' by emphasizing the token is site-scoped and returns exactly one site.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use (discover account metadata) and when not (to enumerate multiple sites, need separate tokens). Also gives best practices for token sourcing: prefer token_env over token to avoid exposure in logs and transcripts.

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