Get the widget install tag

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior with no parameters. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: no account is needed, the widget resolves the site by domain, and the same tag works across all sites. It does not address caching or whether the tag changes over time, but the extra detail is solid.

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?

Three tight sentences front-loaded with what the tag is, followed by placement and the domain/no-account facts. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 input params and no output schema, the description fully covers what an agent needs: what the tool returns, where the snippet goes, and the key constraint that it is domain-based and account-free.

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?

Zero parameters, so nothing to document; baseline applies. The description compensates by explaining that the tag is domain-resolved rather than parameter-driven, which tells the agent why no input is required.

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 and resource ('Get the one-line script tag') and names the exact artifact produced (the install tag for the WebAbility widget). It is distinguishable from siblings like add_site or list_sites without opening any schema.

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?

Explains the context of use: place it in the <head> or before </body> of a site added with add_site. This ties invocation to a workflow step, though it gives no explicit when-not-to-use or alternate tool comparison.

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