Fetch Page

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral context: use of Jina Reader with a local HTML fallback (indicating reliability strategy) and focus filtering for token savings. No contradictions.

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 sentences: first states the core function and method, second adds the optional focus feature. No redundant or wasted content. Front-loaded effectively.

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 low complexity (2 params), rich schema descriptions, annotations, and an output schema, the description covers the main behavior and the focus filter. It could mention error handling or timeout but is sufficient for a simple fetch 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters already well-described ('http(s) URL to fetch', 'Keep paragraphs matching these terms (~90% token savings)'). The description only echoes 'Use focus to filter paragraphs', adding no new meaning.

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 'Fetch readable page text via Jina Reader with local HTML fallback', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling search tools (e.g., fused_search, deep_research) by targeting a single URL rather than performing searches.

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 explicit when-to-use or alternatives are provided. However, the description implies usage for fetching content from a specific URL, and sibling tool names (search tools) suggest the context. Guidance is implied but not stated.

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