analyze_viewport

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether the tool performs a network fetch, what it returns, or any safety or rate-limit considerations, leaving significant behavioral gaps.

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 concise sentence with no wasted words and is front-loaded with the purpose. It is appropriately brief, though its terseness contributes to other gaps.

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 simple analysis tool with one required parameter and no output schema or annotations, the description is too sparse. It lacks parameter details, return value hints, and any routing guidance relative to the many sibling analysis tools.

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?

The schema description coverage is 0%, and the single 'url' parameter is undocumented. The description only implies a webpage input but does not explicitly explain the URL parameter, its format, or its role.

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 states a specific verb ('Analyze') and resource ('viewport meta tag of a webpage'), making the tool's purpose clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling analysis tools such as analyze_meta or analyze_mobile, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like analyze_meta, analyze_mobile, or analyze_website. The only implied usage is that it analyzes a viewport meta tag, but no context or exclusions are provided.

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