scrape_url

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It only says 'scrape a URL and return its content' without disclosing behaviors like rendering, network side effects, rate limits, authentication requirements, or failure modes. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation safety hints.

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 two concise, front-loaded sentences with no filler. It is efficient and easy to parse, though it is under-specified for the tool's complexity. It earns a high score for conciseness, not completeness.

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 5 parameters, no annotations, and many sibling tools, the description is too minimal to be complete. It provides the primary purpose but lacks essential context about parameters, output structure nuances, or alternatives. The presence of an output schema lessens the need to describe return values, but usage guidance is still insufficient.

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 adds no parameter explanations. Beyond mentioning 'URL' in the purpose, it fails to clarify the meaning, allowed values, or usage of format, selector, max_length, and timeout_profile. The description must compensate for the schema gap and 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 uses the specific verb 'scrape' with the resource 'URL' and clearly states the output is content. By declaring itself the 'Primary tool for content acquisition,' it distinguishes itself from siblings like batch_scrape, crawl_site, and download_file.

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 'Primary tool for content acquisition' provides clear context for when to use this tool among many siblings. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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