ghost_get_site_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses what the tool returns, effectively describing its read-only behavior and output scope. It does not mention rate limits or permissions, but for a zero-parameter get, the enumeration of return fields provides adequate transparency about the tool's effect.

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, dense sentence that front-loads the core action ('Get full site metadata') and then lists specific items. There is no fluff, and every word contributes to clarity. It is optimally concise for the information conveyed.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description fully specifies the tool's purpose and expected return. It covers all relevant facets an agent would need to invoke it correctly, with no missing prerequisites or downstream effects to explain. Nothing essential is absent.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description correctly avoids param details. Schema coverage is 100% (empty object), and the description adds nothing needed for parameters. The baseline of 4 for 0-param tools applies, and the description does not distract or omit anything relevant.

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 clear verb ('Get') and resource ('site info'), enumerating specific data fields (metadata, settings, title, timezone, version, navigation structure). This distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on individual entities like posts, tags, or members, making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description clearly states what the tool returns, implying when it should be used (whenever site-wide metadata is needed). It does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, but the tool is unique among siblings for site info, so the context is clear without needing to name alternatives.

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