crawl

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

Annotations are absent, so description must disclose behaviors. It mentions async operation and polling ID but omits details on crawl duration, error handling, rate limits, or URL restrictions. Minimal transparency for a tool with no annotations.

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?

Two sentences are concise but overly brief for a tool with two parameters. Could add critical details without becoming verbose, so it's adequate but not optimally informative.

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 async complexity and lack of annotations, the description leaves significant gaps: no explanation of kwargs, polling mechanism, or how to use the crawl_id with siblings. Incomplete for an agent to operate effectively.

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 0%, and description adds no explanation for either parameter. 'kwargs' is entirely opaque. Agent has no semantic help beyond the schema types.

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 verb 'start', resource 'asynchronous crawl', and indicates the async nature plus the return of a crawl_id for polling. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'fetch' or 'scrape' which are typically synchronous single-page tools.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. Does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or when to prefer siblings like 'map_site' or 'extract'.

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