fetch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that Arc Gate inspects results for prompt injection, blocked results return errors, and the raw option affects output format. Key behaviors are transparent.

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?

The description is concise and front-loaded, covering the core action and parameter details in one paragraph. Every sentence adds value, though slightly more structured formatting could improve readability.

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 the presence of an output schema (not shown), return values are not needed. The description covers usage, parameters, security, and failure modes. Missing details like rate limits or idempotency are acceptable for a fetch tool.

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?

The input schema has a single generic 'kwargs' string with 0% description coverage. The description compensates fully by explaining that kwargs represent keyword arguments and detailing the actual parameters: url (required, string), max_length (optional, int), raw (optional, bool).

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 clearly states the tool fetches a URL via an upstream MCP server, listing parameters like url, max_length, and raw. It is specific and distinguishes the action, though no siblings exist to differentiate.

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 description provides context like 'No authentication required' and 'Policy: balanced', but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Since no sibling tools are defined, this is acceptable but could be more directive.

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