Scrape a URL into the running physical-operator onboarding session. Triggers a stealth fetch + structured extraction (machines, hours, services, certifications). Returns a small JSON summary; full extraction is appended to the session's running profile and visible via /live-data. Auth-required.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Session id returned by pcc_onboard_session_start. | |
| url | Yes | URL to scrape (e.g. company About page). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations only provide readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false. The description goes beyond: it discloses the auth requirement, the stealth-fetch mechanism, the append-to-running-profile side effect, and the /live-data visibility path. That is solid behavioral context for a mutation-shaped tool.
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 tight sentences front-loaded with the action, then mechanism, then return profile. No filler.
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?
Given no output schema, the description correctly notes the return shape ('small JSON summary') and that the full extraction persists elsewhere. Covers the key unknowns for this mutation tool; only missing explicit prerequisites beyond 'Auth-required.'
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 100% and both params are described there. The description only hints at the 'id' linkage ('running session') and example URL source ('company About page') without adding format/semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3.
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) and resource (URL/auth-required onboarding session). The parenthetical 'stealth fetch + structured extraction' clarifies what kind of scrape. Missing sibling disambiguation versus pcc_onboard_session_ingest_docs, which is a closely related session-data ingestion tool.
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?
Fits within an obvious session-scraping family, but does not say when to use this vs. pcc_onboard_session_ingest_docs or pcc_onboard_session_build_agent. Usage is only implied by name and training context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.