analyze_open_graph

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing: not whether it fetches the live page or requires network access, what happens when a page has no Open Graph tags, or what shape the result takes. 'Analyze' is a black box.

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?

A single tight sentence with the resource front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity comes at the cost of the content the other dimensions flag as missing.

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?

For a tool with no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter documentation, the description should at minimum sketch what is returned and how missing/malformed Open Graph data is handled. It does none of this.

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 0%, but there is only one parameter and 'url' with format uri is self-explanatory, so the semantic gap is small. The description adds no information about whether the URL is fetched server-side or what forms are accepted.

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 ('Analyze') and a specific resource ('Open Graph metadata'), which is enough to distinguish it from the broader analyze_meta or analyze_social siblings. However, it does not explicitly name those siblings, so the differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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 gives no indication of when to reach for this tool versus analyze_meta, analyze_social, or analyze_structured_data. No prerequisites, no exclusions, no alternative routing information.

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