firecrawl_scrape

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only states the basic action (scrape and return content) but omits details on error handling, rate limits, authentication, or what happens with complex pages. The minimal disclosure does not adequately inform an AI agent about potential behaviors.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words. It is concise, but the brevity sacrifices some useful detail. Still, it is appropriately sized for a straightforward scrape operation.

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 core function, but given no output schema and multiple parameters, more context would be helpful (e.g., typical use cases, behavior with dynamic content). It is minimally complete but could be improved.

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 100%—all 5 parameters have descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate. It does not elaborate on parameter usage or relationships.

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 it scrapes a single webpage and returns markdown content. The verb 'scrape' and resource 'single webpage' are specific. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like firecrawl_crawl (multiple pages) or firecrawl_map, but the distinction is implied.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus its siblings (crawl, crawl_status, map). There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or context for selection, which is critical given the related tools.

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