Extract clean, readable web page content from a URL via Tavily to retrieve full text and raw content for research or literature review.
Extract clean, readable page content from a URL via Tavily (api.tavily.com/extract).
Requires TAVILY_API_KEY. Returns the extracted raw content for each result URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations, so the description carries the burden. It usefully discloses the API dependency (TAVILY_API_KEY) and the return shape (raw content per result URL), but omits failure modes, rate limits, and whether the URL count is bounded.
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 tight sentences with zero waste. Action and provider are front-loaded, and the auth/return notes follow concisely.
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?
Covers the essentials: what it does, the external dependency, and the return shape. Given only one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, this is nearly sufficient, though it could mention expected input format (e.g., full URL vs. scheme requirements).
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?
Only one parameter and zero schema description coverage. The description clarifies that it accepts a URL and implies per-URL extraction, and notes content is 'raw' which hints at the output format. Baseline 4 for a single-param tool with a reasonably explained parameter.
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 (extract) and resource (clean readable page content from a URL) and names the underlying provider. It distinguishes from search_* siblings by being the content-retrieval step, though it doesn't explicitly name them.
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?
Implied usage: fetching content from a known URL, contrasted with sibling search tools that discover URLs. However, no explicit when-to-use vs. when-not or direct callout of alternatives like search_tavily.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.