Argus

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Mentions 'clean' text (indicating processing occurs), but fails to disclose safety profile, rate limits, external dependencies, or what 'clean' specifically entails (HTML stripping vs article extraction).

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?

Single efficient sentence with no wasted words. However, given the lack of annotations and schema descriptions, the description is too terse to fully inform an agent.

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?

Sufficient for a simple single-parameter tool with an output schema (which handles return documentation). However, gaps remain regarding parameter documentation and behavioral traits that the description should cover given 0% schema annotation coverage.

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 has 0% description coverage. While the description implies the URL parameter ('from a URL'), it adds no details about expected format (http/https requirements), validation rules, or examples to compensate for the schema's lack of documentation.

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?

States specific verb 'Extract' and resource 'text content from a URL'. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'expand_links' or 'search_web' that also interact with 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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_web' (which might also return content) or 'expand_links'. No prerequisites or error conditions mentioned.

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