Crawl a website to Markdown

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

Describes algorithm (breadth-first), restrictions (in-domain links, depth/page limit), and behavior relative to sibling 'scrape' (same proxy/block-handling). No annotations were provided, so description carries full burden; it covers core behavioral traits without contradiction.

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?

Three sentences, each adding value. Front-loaded with purpose, followed by behavioral details and usage guidance. Zero wasted words.

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 crawl tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, description covers algorithm, constraints, and expected result (Markdown). Lacks explicit mention of return format details, but the purpose is clear enough.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds context like 'breadth-first' and 'same proxy/block-handling as scrape' but does not elaborate on individual parameters beyond schema descriptions.

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 clearly states 'Breadth-first crawl a site starting from a URL and return each page as clean Markdown.' The verb (crawl) and resource (website, Markdown) are specific, and the tool is distinguished from siblings 'scrape' and 'screenshot' by being a bulk crawl.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use to ingest a docs site or section of a site.' and mentions equivalence to 'scrape' in proxy/block-handling. However, it does not specify when not to use or list alternatives explicitly.

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