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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, openWorldHint=true, but the description adds material context the annotations do not: the tool requires an x402 payment, the signature must be placed at _meta["x402/payment"], the client must support the x402 protocol, and pricing is $0.01 per successful URL. These are non-obvious prerequisites an agent must know before calling.

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, front-loaded with the tool's function, then the payment prerequisite. No padding, though the wrapper sentence and Actor description are slightly redundant.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be described, and the payment protocol, cost, and URL extraction scope are covered. The only gap is routing guidance against the sibling polling tools, which the waitSecs schema description partially addresses.

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 description coverage is 100%, so urls, waitSecs, concurrency, and timeout_seconds are all documented in the schema with defaults, ranges, and examples. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource via the Actor summary: 'Extract metadata, Open Graph, JSON-LD and headings.' The wrapper framing ('calls the Actor ... and retrieves its output results') is generic, but the embedded Actor description makes the actual function clear and distinguishable from siblings like get-actor-run or get-dataset-items.

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?

Nothing in the description says when to choose this tool over get-actor-run, get-dataset-items, or abort-actor-run. The waitSecs schema field hints at a polling fallback to get-actor-run, but the description itself gives no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.

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