add_blocked_url

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action and parameter defaults, but does not mention side effects, permissions, idempotency, or behavior when URL already blocked. The raise condition is minimal.

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 compact docstring with a one-line summary, parameter list, and raise section. It is front-loaded and every sentence serves a purpose, with no wasted 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?

Given the 6-parameter complexity and presence of an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, and one error condition. However, it omits success output, prerequisites (e.g., site existence), and potential additional errors, making it slightly 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?

The description adds meaning beyond the schema for most parameters (e.g., entity_type and request_type map integers to human-readable options, date default described). However, the required 'self' parameter is not explained, leaving a gap despite 0% schema description coverage.

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 clearly states 'Add a blocked URL to a site', which is a specific verb+resource pair. It distinguishes from siblings like 'remove_blocked_url' and 'get_blocked_urls'.

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 implicitly indicates when to use this tool (to block a URL) but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. The mention of a raise condition provides some context but no comparative advice.

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