Outline of a page

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

The annotations already establish that this is read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the description does not need to repeat that. It adds useful context by specifying that the input can be a page or PDF and by enumerating the returned metadata, going beyond what annotations alone provide.

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 packs in the output contents, supported input types, and the read_page relationship. It is slightly dense and grammatically awkward near the end, but every phrase earns its place.

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 an output schema, 100% schema parameter coverage, and safety annotations, nothing essential is missing. The description explains what data is returned and how to use it with read_page, making the tool fully callable.

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 coverage is 100%: both url and depth have descriptions. The tool description adds no extra parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 identifies the tool's output: headings of a page or PDF with section ids, sizes, title, site, date, and length. It distinguishes itself from read_page by presenting itself as the outline rather than the full page content.

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 gives an explicit workflow: use page_outline to locate a section, then call read_page with that section instead of reading the whole page. This tells the agent when this tool is the right choice and when read_page is the alternative.

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