basecamp_parse_url

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It only states what the tool does but discloses no behavioral traits: no mention of network activity, read-only nature, error handling, input format requirements, or return structure. The description is too minimal to be transparent.

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 sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or 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?

Given the tool's low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description states the purpose and the kind of IDs returned. However, it does not describe the return format or behavior on invalid URLs, which would be important for an agent relying solely on this description. It is adequate but with clear gaps.

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 0%, and the description adds only that the 'url' parameter is a Basecamp URL. It does not explain what URL formats are accepted, whether full or partial URLs work, or provide examples. The description partially compensates but lacks the detail needed for reliable invocation.

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 uses a specific verb ('Parse') with a clear resource ('Basecamp URL') and explicit output ('extract IDs (account, project, card/todo)'). It clearly distinguishes this utility tool from the many CRUD and read operations in the sibling list.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention typical use cases like preparing IDs for subsequent Basecamp calls, nor does it state exclusions or prerequisites. The description is purely functional without context.

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