scan_dead_links

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

No annotations provided, so description fully covers behavior: probing strategy (HEAD then GET), result fan-out, handling of paywalled (blocked) and offline (skipped), and explicitly states read-only. No contradictions.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no fluff. Each sentence adds distinct information (purpose, method, constraints).

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 output schema exists, no need to explain return values. Parameters are fully covered in schema and description. Complexity is moderate; description handles all aspects clearly.

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%, but description adds value: offline=skip network probes, timeout=per-request, concurrency=maximum concurrent probes. Only minor gap: no format details beyond schema.

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?

Description starts with 'Diagnose dead source URLs' (specific verb+resource) and clarifies scope 'across knowledge cards.' Distinguishes from siblings like fetch_url (single URL fetch) and scan_stale_knowledge (stale content).

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?

Implies usage for diagnosing dead links, but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use vs. alternatives. Could mention not for single URL checking (fetch_url) or content validation (validate_knowledge).

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