Get a scrape record

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, but the description adds real behavioral content beyond them: it enumerates what the record holds (request with header names substituted, verdict, lanes tried, usage, warnings), states the explicit boundary 'no page body', and discloses the retention policy ('kept without a time limit'). It stops short of auth or rate-limit detail, so not a 5.

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, front-loaded with the core action and identifier before the content inventory. The list of held fields is dense but each item is informative; nothing is pure filler, though the inventory is slightly long.

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 needn't be explained; the description nonetheless covers purpose, record contents, the page-body exclusion, and retention. For a single-parameter read tool this is complete, missing only explicit alternative-tool routing.

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 the schema already documents the single id parameter and the description only echoes that it is 'metadata.scrapeId on the response'. Marginal added value, consistent with the baseline 3 when structured fields do 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?

States a specific verb (Read) and resource (one scrape call's record) and keys it to the scrapeId, clearly distinguishing it from the scraping sibling (scrape) and from get_crawl/get_batch record readers by resource. An agent can select it without opening the schema.

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 definition implies usage ('by its scrapeId, which is metadata.scrapeId on the response') so an agent knows it is a post-scrape lookup, but it names no alternative tools or when-not conditions (e.g., versus get_batch_items or get_crawl_pages for other record types). Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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