search_scrapers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, and the description adds real value by enumerating the returned fields (dataset_id, name, domain, collection_methods) in the absence of an output schema. It does not disclose result-count behavior, default result size, or empty-result handling, which leaves a minor gap.

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?

Three short sentences: purpose, return shape, next action. No filler, and the identifying information is front-loaded before the return/next-step details.

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 two-param read-only discovery tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, return fields and the follow-up call, which is nearly everything an agent needs. The uncovered `limit`/pagination behavior is the only meaningful omission.

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%, so the description carries the burden. Its examples ('amazon reviews', 'linkedin.com') do clarify what the required `query` accepts, but the `limit` parameter (1-50, default 10) is never mentioned, leaving half the parameters undocumented anywhere.

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 states a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('Bright Data pre-built scraper / Web Scraper API, 1,200+ sites') and instantly grounds it with two concrete query examples. An agent can distinguish this discovery tool from siblings like get_scraper_details or run_scraper without opening any schema.

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 gives clear usage context plus an explicit next step: 'call get_scraper_details with a dataset_id and one method.' It does not name exclusions or close alternatives (e.g., when to prefer search_dataset or ask_brightdata_assistant instead), so it stops just short of a 5.

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