get-indexing-samples

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the scope that results are 'sample' URLs rather than exhaustive or historical, but says nothing about pagination behavior or ordering, which matters for a sampled list tool.

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 short sentences, zero waste, and the primary purpose is front-loaded ahead of the routing guidance. Every clause earns its place by steering tool selection.

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 read-only, no-output-schema tool the routing guidance is complete, but limit/offset paging behavior is undocumented in both schema and description, leaving a real gap for an agent that needs to page through samples.

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 only 33% – host_id is described, but limit and offset carry no schema description and the tool description never mentions them. With low coverage the description should compensate for pagination parameters, and it does not.

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+resource ('Get sample indexed URLs') and immediately distinguishes itself from two named siblings with different scopes. An agent can tell it apart from get-indexing-history and get-search-events-samples 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?

Explicitly states when to use it ('user wants example URLs Yandex has indexed') and two when-not cases, each paired with the correct alternative tool to call instead. Nothing is left to inference.

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