crawl_website

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions credit cost (15-60) but fails to state if the tool is read-only, if it respects robots.txt, or any rate limits. The agent gains insufficient insight into side effects or safety considerations beyond cost.

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 short and front-loaded with the main action, but it wastes space by repeating 'VISIBLYAI_API_KEY' requirement and credit range, which could be inferred. It is not verbose, but could be more efficient while adding essential parameter information.

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 annotations, 0% schema coverage, and an output schema not described here, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain the optional OnPage analysis, the output structure, or how the keyword parameter affects results. The tool is complex enough to warrant more detail.

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 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain any of the three parameters (url, keyword, max_pages). The agent must infer that url is the target, keyword is for SEO context, and max_pages limits crawl depth. This is a critical gap for correct tool use.

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 crawls a website and optionally performs a 24-point OnPage SEO analysis. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like onpage_analysis or audit_sitemap, which focus on specific aspects rather than crawling. However, it could better differentiate when to use this tool versus those siblings.

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 mentions the required API key and suggests checking account balance via get_account_info. This gives basic usage context, but it does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., analyze_url_structure). It also doesn't describe any prerequisites or typical workflow.

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