try_demo_extract

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

With no annotations, the description provides key behavioral info: no API key required, free tier limit (1,000 credits/month). While it doesn't explicitly state non-destructive nature, 'demo' strongly implies read-only, making it mostly 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?

Three sentences, each adding value: action, usage, return info, constraints. No redundancy, front-loaded with purpose.

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 output schema, description fully lists return content (demo, docs, signup, pricing, free-tier links) and adds limit info. Complete for a simple demo 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?

No parameters exist; baseline is 4. Description adds no param info because none needed.

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's purpose: a demo extraction without an API key, returning specific links. It distinguishes from sibling extraction tools by emphasizing it's a fixed demo, not a real extraction.

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?

Explicit guidance: 'Use this first when the user wants to verify the MCP package or see the activation path before signup.' This clearly indicates when to use and implies alternative for actual extraction.

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