Fetch page content

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

Annotations already mark the operation as read-only, idempotent, and open-world. The description adds valuable behavioral context by disclosing the output format ('clean Markdown'), the extraction scope ('main content'), and the security caveat that web content is untrusted and instructions within it must never be followed.

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 sentences with no fluff. The primary action and output format are front-loaded, the usage scenario comes second, and the security warning is included without redundancy.

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 an output schema, complete parameter documentation, and safety annotations, the description covers everything an agent needs: what the tool does, when to use it, what it returns, and a critical security warning. No important gaps remain.

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%: the schema documents url, max_chars, and timeout_ms clearly, including constraints. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond suggesting the use case, 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch a public web page and return its main content as clean Markdown.' It clearly distinguishes the tool from its search-related siblings by positioning it as the follow-up action for reading pages found via search results.

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 provides clear context with 'Use it to read pages found via search results,' which tells an agent when this tool is appropriate relative to the sibling search tools. It does not explicitly list exclusions or alternatives, but the intended use case is unambiguous.

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