deepseek_fetch

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden alone; it discloses the return shape (title + extracted Markdown) and the public-page restriction, which is genuinely useful. It says nothing about authentication requirements, rate limits, payload size limits, or how non-HTML or failed fetches behave.

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, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the return value appended. Nothing is redundant and nothing is buried.

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 one-parameter fetch tool with no output schema, the description covers what it does, the input domain, and the return format, which is enough to call it correctly. Failure modes and content-type handling are the only meaningful omissions.

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% and the single url parameter is already documented as "HTTP(S) page URL." The description's only addition is the "public" qualifier, which marginally narrows valid values but adds no format or syntax detail 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?

A specific verb ("Fetch") plus a specific resource ("a public HTTP(S) webpage") and an explicit statement of what comes back (title and extracted Markdown). It implicitly contrasts with deepseek_search (URL retrieval vs. query), but never names the sibling or states the boundary explicitly.

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 word "public" is the only usage constraint given, telling the agent which targets are in-scope. There is no guidance on when to prefer this over deepseek_search, no prerequisites, and no exclusions (e.g., authenticated or JS-rendered pages).

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