Returns the current page's main content as markdown for summarization or extraction, letting agents analyze text without acting on elements.
Return the current page's readable content as markdown (for extraction / summarisation, as opposed to acting on elements).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description must cover behavior. It states output is readable content as markdown but doesn't disclose if page loading is required, failure conditions, or that it's a read-only operation. Adequate but could add more behavioral context.
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?
One concise sentence with clear structure, front-loading the purpose and adding contextual use-case. No wasted words.
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?
With zero parameters and an existing output schema, the description fully covers the tool's functionality, format, and intended use. Complete for a simple extraction tool.
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?
No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%. Description correctly adds no param info, as none needed.
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?
Description clearly states the tool returns readable content as markdown, specifying the format and use case (extraction/summarisation). It distinguishes from acting on elements, providing clear purpose.
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?
Explicitly contrasts with acting on elements, giving context when to use this tool vs interaction tools (click, type_text). Could be more explicit about exclusions (e.g., not for navigation or screenshots), but provides sufficient guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.