text_extract_urls

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions filtering, sorting, deduplication, and supported schemes, but does not explain how the extractionMode parameter works, what values it accepts, whether the tool is destructive, or any error conditions. This leaves significant gaps for the agent.

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 relatively short but contains redundancy: 'Extract URLs' appears twice, and 'Menu ID' is unnecessary. It could be more succinct by merging the first two sentences. However, it is still reasonably front-loaded.

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 7 required parameters with no schema descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not specify the return format, error handling, or parameter details, making it hard for an agent to use correctly without invoking describe_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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It broadly mentions filtering, custom schemes, sorting, etc., but fails to explain parameter constraints or format (e.g., valid values for extractionMode, how customSchemes are specified). The agent cannot determine correct parameter values from the description alone.

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 'Extract URLs from text' with specific capabilities like filtering by scheme, host, or pattern, sorting, deduplication, and context capture. It distinguishes from sibling tools like text_extract_emails by focusing on URLs.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not specify prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it. It only mentions using describe_tool for more info, but does not provide direct guidance.

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