get_contents

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It discloses the key limitation that only indexed URLs are supported and that missing URLs require separate crawling, but it does not describe return format, error behavior, or whether multiple URLs are fetched independently.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, followed immediately by the important indexed-URL constraint.

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 one-parameter read tool, the description covers the essential scope constraint. It remains incomplete because there is no output schema and the description does not explain what is returned beyond 'page text with source URLs', nor does it clarify behavior for multiple or invalid URLs.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the single 'urls' parameter. It adds meaningful semantics by indicating the URLs must be indexed and that missing ones are out of scope, but it does not explain the array behavior or whether multiple URLs are accepted in one call.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Read indexed page text'. This is clear enough for an agent to know it fetches page content, but it does not explicitly differentiate its role from the sibling tools search or find_similar.

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 sentence 'Missing URLs must be crawled separately' implies the tool only works for already-indexed URLs and that unindexed content requires another mechanism. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool instead of search or find_similar.

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