fetch_page_links

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states a simple read-like action ('Return'), but does not disclose potential caveats such as handling of relative URLs, redirects, unreachable pages, or deduplication. The behavior is underspecified beyond the basic operation.

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, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. It conveys the core function efficiently.

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?

Although an output schema exists (so return values are presumably defined), the description lacks usage context and behavioral caveats. For a one-parameter tool, the description is minimally adequate but leaves open questions about edge cases and alternative tool selection, especially without annotations to fill in safety and side-effect information.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description adds minimal meaning by referring to the 'given page', which maps to the `url` parameter. However, it does not clarify expected URL format, requirements for absolute URLs, or any constraints, leaving the parameter semantics largely to the schema's property name.

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 'Return a list of all URLs found on the given page' uses a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('URLs found on the given page'), clearly distinguishing it from the sibling tool fetch_url_text, which is presumably about text extraction.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling tool fetch_url_text is named in the context but not referenced in the description, leaving the agent without explicit selection criteria.

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