kivest_scrape_web

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the core action and output format; it does not mention potential side effects (e.g., hitting external sites), eventual errors, rate limits, or requirements like JavaScript rendering. The transparency is minimal for a web scraping tool, which could behave in ways the agent does not expect.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It directly states what the tool does and what it returns, achieving maximum clarity with minimal length.

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?

The tool is simple (1 param, no output schema), so the description's coverage of input and output basics is acceptable. However, it omits edge cases, error behavior, and any constraints on the URL. The description meets the minimum bar but leaves gaps that could affect an agent's ability to invoke it correctly in varied scenarios.

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?

With schema coverage at 100% and the 'url' parameter already described as 'The URL of the website to scrape', the tool description adds no extra semantic nuance about the URL format, validity, or processing. The baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema already provides all necessary parameter semantics.

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 uses a specific verb 'Scrape' and identifies the resource as 'website', with a clear output promise of 'clean markdown content'. This unambiguous verb+resource structure distinguishes it from sibling search tools (kivest_web_search, kivest_image_search, etc.) and all other listed tools.

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?

No explicit usage guidance is provided, such as when to prefer this over kivest_web_search or how to handle URLs. The tool's unique purpose implies when to use it, but the description does not articulate exclusions, alternatives, or contextual conditions. This is adequate but not fully developed.

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