batch_scrape

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description builds on that by adding useful context: parallel processing, return content (markdown and metadata), the 10-URL limit, and the js_rendering behavior. It does not cover failure handling or rate limits, but given the annotations, the added context is valuable.

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?

The description is concise and front-loaded with the main action, followed by use cases, return info, and arguments. It is efficient, though it could be slightly more structured with bullet points for the Args section. Still, every sentence contributes meaningfully.

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 batch scraping tool, the description covers the limit, parallel behavior, return format, and one toggle. But it omits the 'config' parameter entirely, says nothing about error handling or partial failures, and doesn't specify the result structure (e.g., keyed by URL). This leaves some gaps for a complex operation.

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 0%, and the description compensates for 'urls' and 'js_rendering' by explaining their purpose and constraints. However, the 'config' parameter is completely undocumented in both the schema and description, leaving a gap for one of three parameters.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Scrape multiple URLs in a single call (up to 10 URLs).' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the 'much faster than scraping one by one' hints at differentiation from single-URL tools, though it doesn't explicitly name sibling tools like js_scrape or content_scrape.

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 cases: 'competitor analysis, content gap analysis, SERP page comparisons, link prospecting, or any task requiring data from multiple pages.' This gives clear context for when to use the tool, but it doesn't include exclusions or explicit alternatives beyond implying single-page scraping.

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