archive_webpage

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states 'Creates a timestamped snapshot' but omits potential failures, rate limits, or async behavior. Minimal info on side effects or limitations.

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-structured: a concise one-line action, bullet-pointed use cases, sample prompts, and a single param line. No unnecessary text, front-loaded with the main purpose.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers main purpose and usage scenarios. It lacks mention of what the output contains (e.g., archive URL) and any prerequisites like authentication, but overall is fairly complete given the tool's simplicity.

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 single parameter 'url' is described as 'The URL of the webpage to archive.' Given 0% schema description coverage, this adds needed semantics. However, it could be more detailed (e.g., format requirements, supported protocols).

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 'Archive a webpage on archive.today (archive.is) for permanent preservation' and lists specific use cases like preserving news articles or product pages. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like visit_page or google_search.

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 sample prompts and suggests when to use (e.g., preserving articles, social media posts), but does not include exclusion criteria or mention alternative tools for similar tasks. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' guidance.

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