crawl_incremental

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully covers behavioral traits: anti-detection mechanisms (page size variation, jittered delays, pauses), work hours gating, and stopping condition. Contradictions none.

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 fairly concise and well-structured, with purpose first followed by details. Every sentence adds value, but could be slightly more compact. No redundancy.

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 and absence of output schema, the description covers the core functionality, work hours, and anti-detection. However, it lacks details on return format or what happens on errors, which would enhance completeness.

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. It explicitly explains override_work_hours and partially explains max_pages (stopping condition), but does not describe fakeid or delay_seconds. Some parameters are hinted but not fully detailed.

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 tool's purpose: pulling only newer articles than what is stored locally. This distinguishes it from siblings like fetch_article (single article), list_articles_page (non-incremental listing), and list_stored_articles (already stored).

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 when to use this tool (incremental updates) and provides context about work hours gate and override. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it and does not name alternative siblings for specific cases.

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