rag

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it mentions 'extração inteligente de conteúdo' and references Apify RAG Web Browser, it doesn't describe important behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication requirements, error handling, or what happens when JavaScript rendering is enabled. The description is insufficient for a tool with 7 parameters and complex functionality.

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, efficient sentence that immediately conveys the core functionality. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the essential information about what the tool does.

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 complex web search and extraction tool with 7 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. While concise, it doesn't explain what the tool returns, how results are structured, or provide context about the extraction intelligence. With no annotations and no output schema, more completeness would be expected for such a feature-rich 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema. The baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema does all the parameter documentation work.

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 tool performs web search with intelligent content extraction, providing a specific verb ('Busca web') and resource ('conteúdo'). It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning 'extração inteligente de conteúdo' and referencing Apify RAG Web Browser, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from fetchFullContent, scrape, or screenshot.

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 about when to use this tool versus the sibling tools (fetchFullContent, scrape, screenshot). The description mentions it's similar to Apify RAG Web Browser, but this doesn't help an agent choose between available alternatives in this server.

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