extract_links

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses dedupe and limit behaviors, which is useful, but it does not explain the effect of selector or sameOriginOnly, nor does it state whether the operation is read-only or what the return format is. Partial transparency only.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and each phrase earns its place. No unnecessary text or repetition.

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?

For a tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is only moderately complete. It explains the core function and two parameters, but omits selector and sameOriginOnly behavior, and does not hint at the output structure, leaving the agent to guess.

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 coverage is only 20% (tabId has a description). The description adds meaning for dedupe and limit, but selector and sameOriginOnly remain unexplained. It partially compensates for the low schema coverage but leaves gaps.

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 identifies the tool's function: extracting anchors from the page or a subtree. This is specific (verb 'Extract' + resource 'anchors') and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_text or get_html.

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 description implies usage (when you need links), but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. No sibling comparisons are given.

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