flycrawl_scrape

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully reveals that the tool executes JavaScript, handles anti-bot challenges such as Cloudflare, and extracts main content, which are meaningful behavioral traits beyond a generic 'scrape' label. It does not cover failure modes or edge cases, but the key execution behaviors are disclosed.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the core action and output format, then adds key capabilities without wasted words. Every clause contributes useful 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?

The tool has only two parameters, both fully documented in the schema, and the description states the output format (markdown or HTML) and processing behavior. Since there is no output schema, explicitly stating that the result is clean markdown or HTML provides enough context for an agent to invoke it correctly. Slight gap: no mention of response structure or error conditions, but this is minor for such a simple 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?

The input schema already covers both parameters with 100% description coverage, so the baseline applies. The description's mention of 'extracts main content' loosely aligns with onlyMainContent, but it does not add meaning beyond the schema's own description of stripping navigation, headers, footers, and ads.

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 ('Scrapes') with a clear resource ('any webpage') and a concrete output ('clean, LLM-optimized markdown or HTML'). It also mentions 'extracts main content,' which further clarifies the tool's function and distinguishes it from the sibling search/map/extract 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?

There is no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus flycrawl_search, flycrawl_map, or flycrawl_extract. The description implies it is for fetching page content, but it does not state when not to use it or which sibling would be more appropriate for other tasks.

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