ihyee-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'fetch and extract clean content' and returns specific data types, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or what 'clean content' entails. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that interacts with external web resources.

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 front-loaded and efficiently structured in two sentences with zero waste. It clearly states the tool's purpose and outputs without unnecessary details, making it easy to understand quickly.

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?

Given the complexity of web fetching and extraction, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral aspects like permissions, rate limits, or error cases, and does not explain the structure or format of returned data, leaving the agent with insufficient context for reliable use.

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%, so the schema fully documents parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining the implications of 'content_mode' choices or when to use 'render'. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('fetch and extract clean content') and resource ('from specific web page URLs'), and specifies the return values ('extracted text, summaries, metadata, and links'). It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on direct URL fetching rather than rendering or searching, though 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?

The description implies usage for extracting content from web pages, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'ihyee_render' or 'ihyee_search'. It provides some context with the 'render' parameter hinting at JavaScript-heavy pages, but lacks clear guidance on tool selection.

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