scrape_url

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behaviors itself. It mentions the output format (markdown) and method options, but lacks details on error handling, rate limits, or side effects of scraping. The short description leaves significant behavioral aspects unmentioned.

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 extremely concise, front-loading the core function. However, it could benefit from a bit more detail without becoming verbose, so not a 5.

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 lack of annotations, 0% schema coverage, and a tool with multiple method-specific behaviors, the description is incomplete. It does not clarify return structure beyond 'markdown content' or provide enough to correctly select between methods.

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 names the 'method' parameter and its three options, but does not explain the differences between them or the expected format of 'url.' Since schema coverage is 0%, the description only partially compensates.

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 'Scrape a single URL and return markdown content,' which clearly identifies the tool's action and output. It differentiates from siblings like 'search_all' by specifying 'single URL,' though it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus the siblings (research, search_all, etc.). The description only states what it does, not the context or comparison.

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