phish_check

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

No annotations, and the description fails to disclose what the tool returns (e.g., boolean, risk score), any side effects, rate limits, or authentication needs. The agent cannot infer behavior beyond the name.

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 very short and front-loads the core purpose with a security tag. However, it includes pricing and an API link, which are not essential for AI selection. Still, it wastes no words.

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?

No output schema and no hint of return format. Given the tool's security nature and many sibling tools, the agent needs more context about what the output looks like (e.g., risk level, boolean). Incomplete.

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 100% for the single parameter 'url', so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's '要检测的URL' (URL to detect).

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 explicitly states '钓鱼网站检测' (phishing website detection) and the pricing, making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It strongly distinguishes from siblings by focusing on phishing, not general malware or verification.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'virus_scan' or 'domain_whois'. The description only mentions pricing and API endpoint, lacking context for appropriate usage.

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