js_scrape

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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=true, which covers the safety profile. The description adds behavioral context such as waiting for JavaScript to fully execute and returning SEO audit signals. It also specifies the wait_for parameter's default and max values, but does not describe error handling or timeout behavior, so it is not fully exhaustive.

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 well-organized with a clear introduction, comparison, use cases, return summary, and Args section. It is concise and front-loaded with the tool's purpose, and every sentence adds value.

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?

The description covers the main functionality, including what it returns (SEO audit signals). However, it fails to explain the config parameter, and does not address edge cases such as slow-loading pages or error handling. Given the tool's complexity, it is reasonably complete but not exhaustive.

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 description documents url and wait_for with examples and defaults, but entirely omits the config parameter from the schema. Since schema description coverage is 0%, this is a clear gap. The wait_for documentation adds max and default values beyond the schema, but the config parameter remains unexplained, making it a minimum viable score.

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 scrapes JavaScript-rendered pages, specifically SPAs, React, Vue, and Angular apps. It distinguishes from a standard scrape by mentioning it waits for JS execution, which is a clear differentiator even if the sibling is not explicitly named.

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?

It explicitly states when to use this tool: for single-page applications, dynamic content, or any page where content loads via JS. It also contrasts with the standard scrape, implying that for non-JS pages the standard scrape should be used, providing clear usage guidance.

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