scraping_browser_get_html

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context — that the output can be large — and hints that script/head tags are the distinguishing content. It does not address return format or whether the HTML reflects the current session state.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, which is good, but the second sentence is an awkward run-on ('Avoid using this tool and if used, use full_page option unless...') that conflates a usage warning with a parameter recommendation and trails off into 'since this can be large'.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, this is minimally adequate. The size warning is useful, but nothing explains what 'current page' means or how it relates to the navigation siblings.

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% for the single parameter, and the schema already explains full_page, its inclusion of head/script tags, and the size tradeoff. The description largely restates that same guidance, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get the HTML content of the current page.' An agent can tell it retrieves raw HTML. However, it does not name the sibling it should be preferred over (e.g., scraping_browser_get_text, extract, scrape_as_html), so differentiation from alternatives is left implicit.

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?

It provides a when-not ('Avoid using this tool') and a condition for the full_page option, which is more than nothing. But it never names the alternative to use instead, leaving the agent to infer from sibling names which tool replaces it.

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