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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds that the source must be a 'public URL' and that output is shaped by a caller-supplied schema, but it does not cover rate limits, error behavior, or rendering fallbacks. With annotations carrying the safety profile, this is adequate but not rich.

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 zero waste: purpose first, then the alternative-tool routing. The most decision-relevant information is front-loaded.

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 the description need not explain return values, and all parameters are documented in the schema. It covers purpose and the key sibling alternative. Minor failure-mode or timeout context is missing, but selection is not impaired.

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 url, render, schema, and instructions are already documented in the schema. The description repeats the bounded-schema idea but adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the structured fields provide. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

Names the specific verb 'Scrape' and resource 'public URL', and states the output contract: JSON conforming to a caller-supplied bounded schema. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling web_scrape by output form (structured fields vs. page content).

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?

Directly routes the agent: use web_scrape when the raw page content is needed rather than structured fields, which is an explicit when-not condition and named alternative. No ambiguity remains about which tool to select for structured extraction.

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