get-important-urls

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The description adds routing context but no additional behavioral detail such as pagination behavior, result volume, or what 'configured important URLs' means operationally. Adequate but not additive.

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 sentences, zero filler, with the purpose front-loaded and the exclusion rules following immediately. Every sentence carries routing information an agent needs to pick between siblings.

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?

Sibling disambiguation is complete, but the description omits any pagination guidance despite limit/offset being the only non-trivial parameters, and there is no output schema to explain the return shape. For a list endpoint this leaves a real gap, though the routing burden is well handled.

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 description coverage is only 33%: host_id is documented only as 'Host ID' and limit/offset carry no descriptions. The description says nothing about pagination, defaults, or how limit/offset interact, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap on a listing tool where pagination semantics matter.

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 important URLs for a site'), with a scope qualifier ('configured for the host') that separates it from the many other URL-related siblings. An agent can identify the tool without opening the 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?

Gives an explicit positive trigger ('when the user wants the important URLs configured for the host') and two explicit negative triggers naming the correct alternatives (get-important-url-history for per-URL history, get-indexing-samples for indexed samples). This is a textbook routing instruction.

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