web_crawl

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully reveals breadth-first crawling, that external links are ignored, and that server-enforced caps override requested depth/page values. However, it does not describe request impact, rate limits, robots.txt behavior, or what the return payload looks like.

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 short and front-loaded with the core purpose. The second sentence provides useful behavioral constraints without padding. It could slightly expand on parameters, but it is appropriately concise for what it covers.

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 tool has five parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, so the description should do more to complete the picture. It covers basic crawling boundaries but omits return format, parameter meaning for most inputs, and operational behavior around robots or page content.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning to max_depth and max_pages by mentioning depth/pages and server caps, but it does not explain required parameter url, per_page_chars, or respect_robots. With five parameters and no schema descriptions, this is insufficient.

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 and resource: 'Crawl a bounded set of internal pages from one public website.' It clarifies scope by noting external links are not followed, which helps distinguish it from web_fetch and web_search even though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use web_crawl versus web_fetch, web_extract, or web_search. The description implies the tool is for traversing internal pages, but it does not state when the alternatives are preferable or provide exclusion criteria.

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