Metatag Canonical Set

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not say whether setting overwrites an existing canonical URL, what permissions are required, what happens with invalid or relative URLs, or how this interacts with metatag defaults.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. However, for a three-parameter mutation with no annotations and no schema parameter descriptions, this minimal length is under-specified rather than optimally concise.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. Still, the description omits required context for a mutation tool with no annotations and 0% parameter coverage, leaving entity identification and URL behavior unexplained.

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% for all three required parameters. The description mentions 'entity' and 'canonical URL' but does not explain what entity_type values are accepted, what entity_id format to use, or any constraints on canonical_url.

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 gives a specific verb ('Set') and resource ('canonical URL for an entity'), which is clear for an agent. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from metatag_defaults_set or metatag_config_update, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of alternatives like metatag_defaults_set. The agent can infer that this sets a canonical URL, but nothing beyond that is stated.

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