silkworm_fetch_cdp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions CDP-based rendering but omits significant side effects such as the store_document parameter defaulting to true (which implies storing the fetched HTML), the reliance on ws_endpoint, and timeout behavior. This is a substantial gap for a tool that may persist data.

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 13-word sentence that is front-loaded with the action and key qualifier. Every word contributes to the core purpose, with no fluff or repetition.

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 tool has 7 parameters, no annotations, and a large sibling set, the description is too minimal. It does not address storage side effects, connection details, or usage nuance, leaving the agent to infer critical operational context from the schema alone.

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 0%, and the description provides no explanation for any of the 7 parameters (url, label, headers, ws_endpoint, store_document, timeout_seconds, body_preview_chars). The description does not compensate for the schema's lack of semantic detail.

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 ('Fetch') and resource ('rendered HTML through silkworm's CDP client'), clearly indicating it is for JavaScript-heavy pages. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like silkworm_fetch (likely plain fetch) and query_selector_cdp/extract_structured_data_cdp (which operate on CDP content but have different actions).

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 phrase 'for JavaScript-heavy pages' provides clear context on when to use this tool over a simpler fetch. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, stopping short of full guidance.

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