get_content

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It adds only the context of a 'server-managed session', but does not disclose the return format, error behavior, or any side effects. While 'extract' suggests read-only, it is not explicitly stated.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the main purpose, and contains no superfluous information.

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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides the essential purpose and session context. However, it omits details about the return value or any conditions under which content extraction might fail, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

The schema already documents the only parameter (selector) with a clear description: 'CSS selector to extract content. If omitted, extracts full page'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, matching the baseline for 100% schema coverage.

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 clearly states the action ('Extract content') and the target ('the page'), using the server-managed session. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like navigate_url (navigation) and click_element (interaction). It lacks an explicit comparison, but the verb and resource effectively convey the tool's role.

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 implies this is the tool for retrieving page content within the session, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives such as run_playwright or when not to use it. The usage is inferred from the name and siblings rather than stated.

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