inspection_inspect

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the tool checks indexing, crawl info, and health, but does not elaborate on what 'health' entails, whether it is read-only, or any rate limits. Basic transparency but lacking depth.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded, no redundant words. Could be more detailed but remains concise and scannable.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is somewhat minimal. It covers what the tool does but not the return structure or any behavioral nuances. Moderately complete.

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% so parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema fields.

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 ('Inspect') and resource ('a URL') and states the purpose: 'check its indexing status, crawl info, and health'. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like indexing_status, inspection_batch, or analytics tools.

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 vs alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it. The description does not reference any sibling tools or provide usage context.

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