Retrieve a known public URL as its title and Markdown content via DeepSeek, without calling a chat model. Use it to read a specific web page.
Retrieve one public web page through DeepSeek and return its title and Markdown content. Use to read a known URL. No chat model is called.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| title | Yes | ||
| content | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond them: only public pages are reachable (implying no auth or paywalled content), and 'No chat model is called' rules out any expectation of LLM summarization or reasoning over the page.
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?
Three short sentences with no filler: action and return value first, usage directive second, clarification third. Fully front-loaded.
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?
Output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the annotations cover the safety profile. Scope (single page, public only) is stated. Minor gap: no mention of failure behavior for unreachable or non-public URLs, which matters for a 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?
Only one parameter and schema coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the semantics. 'Known URL' and 'public web page' give implied format and scope, but nothing is said about URL validation, redirects, or what happens on non-public targets. A 3 is fair for a self-evident single 'url' string.
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?
States a specific verb (retrieve), resource (one public web page), and a defined output (title and Markdown content). 'Use to read a known URL' functionally separates it from the sibling search tool, which finds URLs the agent doesn't already have.
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?
'Use to read a known URL' gives clear when-to-use context and implicitly routes away from search for unknown URLs. It stops short of an explicit 'do not use for search/discovery' exclusion, but the selection condition is unambiguous.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.