extract_links

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

With no annotations provided, the description itself must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'extract all hyperlinks' without explaining details like URL normalization, handling of JavaScript-rendered content, or return format. The filter_external parameter is not mentioned in the description, leaving behavior partially unspecified.

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 redundancy or filler. Every word contributes to conveying the core function.

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 three parameters, no annotations, and many sibling tools, the description is too sparse. It lacks usage guidance, behavioral details, and parameter context, making it insufficient for an agent to fully assess when and how to use it correctly.

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 description adds no information about parameters beyond what the schema provides. While the schema describes url and filter_external, the timeout_profile parameter lacks a description, and the tool description does not compensate for this gap.

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 a specific verb ('Extract') and object ('all hyperlinks from a webpage'), making it evident what the tool does. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like extract_contacts and extract_tables by targeting hyperlinks specifically.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as scrape_url or get_sitemap, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. Users must infer usage solely from the tool name and description.

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