util_pricing_page_extract

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not state if the tool is read-only, what happens if the page is not a pricing page, or any side effects. The behavior is implied but not transparent.

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 with no wasted words, but it lacks structure (e.g., listing required inputs, outputs, or examples). It could be more helpful without adding length.

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 complexity (no output schema, no annotations, generic parameter), the description is highly incomplete. It does not explain inputs, outputs, or any constraints, leaving the agent with insufficient information to use the tool correctly.

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 input schema has one generic 'arguments' parameter with no description (0% coverage). The description does not specify what keys or values the arguments object should contain, failing to compensate for the schema gap.

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?

Description clearly states it extracts pricing-page signals like plan names, free trial hints, CTA patterns, and sales routes. It specifies the resource (pricing page) and type of outputs. However, it does not distinguish itself from similar sibling tools like util_page_extract, which extracts generic page signals.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention context, prerequisites, or exclusions. Sibling tools exist (e.g., util_page_extract, util_forms_extract) but no differentiation is provided.

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