dompruner_fetch

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the token reduction percentage, the ability to use a query to request a URL from the host LLM via sampling, and BM25 section filtering. It does not mention potential errors, rate limits, or authentication, but covers core behavioral traits well beyond a basic fetch.

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, front-loaded with 'DEFAULT tool for retrieving web content.' Each sentence adds distinct value: purpose, key behavior, and usage guidance. No redundancy, no fluff.

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 has 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides a comprehensive picture: what it does, when to use it, how parameters work, and what output to expect. Minor omissions like return format details beyond 'Markdown' and potential failure modes are not critical for this simple fetch tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema: it explains the fallback behavior when 'url' is omitted (query triggers URL request via sampling), and that 'query' also enables BM25 section filtering when 'url' is provided. This enriches both parameter meanings.

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 it is the 'DEFAULT tool for retrieving web content' and explicitly says it 'Fetches a URL directly and returns DOM-refined compact Markdown with 90%+ token reduction.' This gives a specific verb ('fetches'), resource ('URL'), and output format, distinguishing it from the mentioned dompruner_search and sibling dompruner_analyze.

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?

It explicitly instructs when to use this tool: 'Always prefer this over dompruner_search when the URL is known or can be inferred (e.g. official docs, changelogs, blog posts, API references).' This provides clear selection criteria and an alternative named tool, which is excellent usage guidance.

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