Discover API surface

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it fetches OpenAPI/Swagger documents, never sends requests to the endpoint APIs themselves, reports on services that could not be reached, and explains safety-policy skips. This is a comprehensive behavioral profile.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and ending with usage advice. It includes only relevant details and no filler, making it efficient and well-structured.

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?

With no output schema, the description adequately summarizes the return values (endpoint count, assertion counts, skipped operations, unreachable services). It also includes safety behavior and usage context, making the description self-sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's outcomes.

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 already fully documents the single optional 'services' parameter with its description. The tool description adds no additional information about the parameter beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies this as a discovery tool for the OpenAPI/Swagger documents of configured services. It specifies the verb 'fetches' and the resource, and reports a specific set of metrics (endpoint count, assertions, skipped operations, unreachable services). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that run tests or generate reports.

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?

Explicitly instructs to 'Use this first to check coverage before running anything', which tells the agent when to invoke this tool relative to the test-running siblings. It also notes that it 'runs no test and sends no request to the endpoints themselves', clarifying that it is safe for pre-flight checks.

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