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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing safety and side effects. It implies a read-only operation via 'Full HTML source' and 'get', but does not explicitly state that it is non-mutating or free of side effects. It also does not mention any error behavior or return format beyond 'source'.

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 only two sentences: the first states the primary function and parameter, the second provides an alternative. It is front-loaded and contains no redundant or filler content.

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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, the parameter source, and the alternative for non-desktop contexts. This is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly, similar to high-scoring examples like get_calls.

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 input schema already describes the only parameter (pageId) as 'Page ID from web_navigate', and the description simply restates 'by pageId'. This adds no meaningful semantic value beyond the schema, warranting the baseline score of 3 for full schema 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 the tool returns the 'Full HTML source' of the 'DESKTOP grid browser page', identified by a pageId. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the device-oriented counterpart (webpage_get_dom), making the purpose and scope unambiguous.

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 gives explicit usage guidance by stating 'Not a device' and provides a direct alternative for phones/tablets: 'use webpage_get_dom (by udid)'. This tells the agent exactly when to use this tool and when to choose a sibling.

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