browser_extract

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds the behavioral detail that it returns structured JSON, but it does not mention potential limitations such as dynamic content or authentication requirements. Given the annotations, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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 two concise sentences, front-loading the purpose and usage. The credit note '(75 credits)' is minor but does not detract. No fluff or redundancy.

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?

For a simple 2-parameter tool with rich annotations, the description covers purpose, usage, and output format. However, it does not mention that this tool handles a single URL per call (given the existence of browser_batch_extract) or address dynamic content, which would enhance completeness. Still, the core information is present.

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%: both parameters have descriptions. The description's mention of 'specific information' aligns with extract_goal but adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 extracts structured data from a web page using specific verbs like 'extract', 'scrape', and 'parse'. It also specifies the output as structured JSON. However, it does not distinguish this tool from sibling tools like browser_extract_to_table or browser_batch_extract, so it lacks sibling differentiation.

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 explicitly says to use the tool when needing to scrape, parse, or retrieve specific information from a URL, providing clear usage context. It does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the given context is sufficient for basic guidance.

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