Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• browser_interactC
  2.3/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions actions but does not indicate that clicking/typing are mutational, whether modifications are reversible, or the need for page focus. Output schema exists but return values are not described.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness2/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence, but it is under-specified rather than concise; it lacks critical details about parameter usage and behavior, making it inefficient for an agent to use correctly.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness1/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given three parameters, no annotation support, and no parameter descriptions, the description fails to provide essential context. It does not cover how to specify actions, query selectors, or input values, leaving the agent to guess.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It lists 'click, type, extract' but does not map them to the 'action' parameter, nor explain the meaning of 'selector' and 'value' in relation to these actions. Parameter semantics are entirely absent.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description specifies the verb 'Interact' and lists example actions (click, type, extract), making it clear that this tool manipulates the active browser page. It distinguishes from sibling tools like scrape_browser which are read-only scraping.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or limitations (e.g., when to prefer a specific sibling tool). The description is purely functional.

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

• scrape_browserC
  2.6/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'isolated incognito browser' implying privacy, but does not explain JavaScript handling, error behavior, or return format. The output schema exists but is not referenced.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness3/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence of 9 words, front-loaded with the core action. However, given the tool's complexity (3 parameters, output schema), it is too brief to be fully informative, balancing conciseness with substance.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The description does not cover parameter usage, output format, or behavioral details. With no annotations and low schema coverage, the description is insufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly without additional inference.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters2/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does not explain the 'scroll' or 'wait_selector' parameters beyond their names, which are somewhat self-explanatory but lack context (e.g., scroll for dynamic loading, wait_selector for element visibility).

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description states 'Navigate a page in an isolated incognito browser and extract text,' which clearly identifies the tool's main action and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'browser_interact' (which likely involves interaction) and 'scrape_reddit' (site-specific), though the term 'extract text' could be more specific about scope.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'scrape_url' or 'browser_interact'. The description lacks any context about prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions.

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

• scrape_urlC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, and the description only states 'static URL' and 'extract readable text content'. It fails to disclose important behaviors like handling of redirects, error states, or any limitations beyond the static nature.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence with no extraneous content, front-loading the core purpose efficiently.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Despite having 3 parameters and an output schema, the description does not explain the optional extraction behaviors or the format of the output. It lacks sufficient detail for an agent to fully understand the tool's capabilities.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 0%, meaning the description adds no meaning to the parameters. It does not mention the optional extract_links or extract_images flags, leaving the agent to infer their purpose solely from the schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description uses the specific verb 'Extract' and the resource 'readable text content from a static URL', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'scrape_browser' (dynamic content) and 'browser_interact' (interactive browsing).

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'scrape_browser' or 'browser_interact'. The description does not mention any preconditions or exclusions.

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

• scrape_redditB
  3.1/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only notes 'public posts' implying read-only, but fails to disclose rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, pagination, or other behavioral traits.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Single sentence is concise and to the point. Could include more detail without being verbose, but structure is efficient.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Tool is low complexity with 3 parameters and an output schema reducing burden. However, description lacks usage guidelines and parameter details, making it only adequately complete.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description adds no explanation of sort or limit parameters beyond their names and defaults. Does not compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Clearly states verb 'Fetch', resource 'public posts from a subreddit', and method 'via the official Reddit API'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like scrape_browser which use different scraping approaches.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Implied usage for fetching Reddit posts, but no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives like scrape_browser or scrape_url, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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

• extract_emailsB
  3.2/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries full transparency burden. It states the tool 'finds' emails on a 'public page' but does not disclose how it works (e.g., HTTP request vs local parsing), whether authentication is needed, or any limitations.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, clear sentence that front-loads the verb. It is appropriately sized with no wasted words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is adequate but minimal. It could add behavioral context (e.g., 'Extracts all anchor text' or 'Results include email addresses found in visible HTML').

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters2/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning. It clarifies that the 'url' parameter refers to a public page, but adds no further syntax or format details. For a single parameter, this is minimally helpful.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description 'Find email addresses on a public page' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the tool's function. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'scrape_url' (general scraping) and 'scrape_reddit' (platform-specific), making its purpose unambiguous.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given sibling tools like 'scrape_url' may also extract emails, lack of usage context makes it harder for an agent to choose correctly.

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