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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true), so credit goes to additions: the job returns an id immediately rather than results, pages are billed individually, and a free API key is required. These are non-obvious operational facts an agent needs; only the polling cadence/expiry of the job id is unstated.

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 short sentences that front-load the batch limit, then the async return contract, then the billing/auth caveats. Efficient, but the orphaned 'Needs a free SnoopScan key.' line reads as an afterthought rather than integrated guidance.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the description still covers the async job-id contract, the polling follow-ups, billing, and auth. Nothing essential to invoking it correctly is missing.

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 0% and the single `urls` array is undocumented in the schema, so the description must carry the load. It does supply the key semantic constraint (maximum 50 URLs per call), though it adds nothing about URL format, duplicates, or per-URL error behavior.

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?

States a specific verb (Scrape), resource (pages), and hard scope limit (up to 50) as one background job. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the single-page sibling `scrape`, so an agent can route correctly without inspecting schemas.

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?

Names the alternative explicitly ('For one page, use `scrape`') and the condition that selects it (batch vs single). It also gives the follow-up path (`crawlStatus`, `crawlPages`), though it doesn't state when *not* to use batch scraping beyond page count.

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