zerodom_read_page

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does well: it discloses that no navigation/reload occurs, preserves page state, and honors prior parse settings. It stops short of explicitly stating there are no other side effects, but 're-read' and 'does not reload' imply a safe, read-only operation.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by use cases and the key distinction. Every sentence earns its place with no filler 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 one-optional-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description covers the main invocation context: when to call, how it differs from alternatives, and what state it preserves. The only notable gap is the undocumented verbose parameter, but the tool's core usage is fully explained.

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 only parameter, verbose, has 0% schema description coverage and is not mentioned in the description. The parameter name is somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no meaning about what verbose controls or when to set it. For a low-coverage schema, the description should compensate but does not.

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 states a specific action ('re-read the current page') and resource ('current page'), and immediately distinguishes it from zerodom_parse_url by noting it does not reload. An agent can clearly tell what this tool does and how it differs from a key sibling.

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?

It explicitly says when to use ('after an action changed the page, or when node ids look stale') and contrasts with zerodom_parse_url, clarifying that typed content is preserved. This gives practical, actionable selection guidance.

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