scrapeer_get_run_steps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety expectations. The description adds behavioral context by noting what the breakdown includes (block errors, timing, preview envelopes) beyond what annotations express. It doesn't detail output structure, but annotations lower the burden.

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: first states purpose, second gives specific use cases, third clarifies what not to use it for. No wasted words, and key decisions are front-loaded.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description communicates the return concept (block-level breakdown with execution timing and preview envelope presence). It references relevant sibling tools and gives enough context to invoke correctly. Slightly more detail on output shape would push it to 5, but it is sufficient.

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?

The input schema fully describes the single parameter, execution_id, including its UUID format and what returns it (scrapeer_run_flow or scrapeer_run_flow_and_wait). The description itself doesn't add parameter-level details, but schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') with a clear resource ('block-by-block execution breakdown of a run'), immediately conveying the tool's scope. It explicitly differentiates itself from scrapeer_get_run_results by contrasting block-level details vs. actual scraped values.

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 provides explicit 'USE THIS TOOL WHEN' conditions and a 'DO NOT USE' exclusion naming the alternative tool. This gives the agent clear decision criteria for selecting this tool over most siblings.

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