scrape_url

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must shoulder behavioral transparency. It only states the basic action and default output, without disclosing that it can also return HTML, handle dynamic content (waitFor), or filter tags. This under-discloses significant behaviors.

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?

One sentence with no redundancy; directly front-loads the tool's purpose.

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?

The schema is rich, but the description is minimal. It doesn't mention the tool's ability to return HTML or to handle dynamic content, though these are in the schema. For a tool with 7 parameters, this is adequate but not thorough.

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 100% and describes all 7 parameters, including formats, timeout, waitFor, and tag filtering. The description merely echoes the markdown default without adding semantic context beyond the schema.

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?

Description states 'Scrape a URL and return the content as markdown' – specific verb (scrape), resource (URL), and output format (markdown), clearly distinguishing from search/email sibling tools.

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 clear context: use when you need to scrape a specific URL. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, but sibling tools are unrelated (search, email), so the intended use case is unambiguous.

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