Fetch page as Markdown

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/openWorldHint/non-destructive, and the description adds real context beyond them: real browser rendering, the size reduction (2-25% of HTML), that it defeats 403/429/captcha blocks, and the billing unit ('one request'). These are operational traits an agent cannot get from the structured fields.

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?

Four dense sentences, front-loaded with what it returns, then capabilities, then the sibling routing rule, then cost. Every sentence carries distinct information and none repeats the schema or annotations.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description specifies the return format precisely (clean Markdown, absolute links, stripped chrome), covers failure/blocking scenarios, and states the billing model. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly and interpret the result.

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 every parameter is documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description only gestures at the render-wait capability ('browser steps') and adds no syntax or defaults beyond the schema, so it neither helps nor hurts.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (fetch a web page, return clean Markdown) and immediately specifies the output shape: main content with absolute links, no scripts/styles/nav/footer. It also names the sibling it is not — fetch_html — so an agent can distinguish them without opening either schema.

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?

Gives explicit use cases ('read, quote or summarise a page') and an explicit routing rule with the alternative: 'Use fetch_html instead when you need the markup, selectors or browser steps.' It also names the conditions that select this tool (JS-rendered pages, 403/429, captcha). Nothing is left to inference.

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