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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It accurately implies a read-only operation by describing the return value as 'Full HTML source,' but it does not state side effects, error behavior, or limitations (e.g., page must exist). The added context of 'DESKTOP grid browser page' is useful but not a full behavioral profile.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The primary purpose is front-loaded, and the mobile-device exclusion is in the second sentence. Every word contributes to routing the agent to the correct usage.

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?

The description plus schema covers everything needed to invoke the tool: what it returns, what the input is and where it comes from, and when to use an alternative. The only minor gap is not describing the format of the returned HTML or potential error conditions, but for a simple read tool with a single parameter this is nearly 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?

The input schema has 100% coverage: pageId is described as 'Page ID from web_navigate.' The description only repeats 'by pageId' without adding extra semantics or format details, so it meets the baseline but does not add value beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the tool returns the full HTML source of a desktop grid browser page, identified by pageId. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the mobile-oriented webpage_get_dom, making the tool's purpose and scope unambiguous even among a large sibling list.

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 provides an explicit when-not-to-use directive: 'Not a device — for a phone or tablet use webpage_get_dom (by udid).' This names the alternative and the condition that triggers it, leaving no ambiguity about choosing between the two tools.

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