Scrape Web

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It transparently discloses the key behavior: it does NOT execute JavaScript, uses linkedom, and returns markdown or JSON. It also explains the wait parameter maps to ax -m timeout. However, it omits details like redirect handling, cookies, or error behavior, which are secondary for a basic scraper.

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 three sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and each sentence earns its place. It includes essential details about return formats, the underlying library, and the limitation, with no redundant phrasing or filler.

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 tool's moderate complexity, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is complete. It covers the main functionality, the key limitation (no JS), the alternative for JS-heavy pages, and the return formats. All parameters are documented in both schema and description, and the description compensates for the lack of an output schema by explicitly stating what the tool returns.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds significant meaning beyond the schema. It clarifies 'wait' as a seconds budget mapped to ax -m (request timeout) and notes ax has no browser wait, which is crucial for understanding the parameter. It also explains the 'format' enum values as text (markdown/content) or json (structured report), providing context the schema alone does not.

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+resource: 'Fetch and parse a web page using yusukebe/ax.' It clearly distinguishes itself from browser tools by noting it does not execute JavaScript and is a fast non-browser scraper, which differentiates it from potential alternatives.

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 explicit guidance: 'for JS-heavy SPAs use a browser tool' clearly states when NOT to use this tool and suggests an alternative. The limitation about no JavaScript execution implies the appropriate use case is static or server-rendered pages.

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