scrape

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

No annotations provided, so description must fully convey behavioral traits. It states the action (fetch, return markdown) but omits potential side effects, rate limits, authentication needs, or limitations (e.g., no JS rendering). Adequate but not rich.

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?

Single sentence with no extraneous information. Every word serves the purpose: verb, resource, output, and context. Efficient and 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one required parameter) and existence of an output schema, the description adequately covers what the agent needs. Return format is specified, and schema handles remaining details.

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 100% (url parameter fully described in schema). Description adds context about output format but does not add new meaning to the parameter itself. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Fetch', identifies resource 'URL', specifies output format 'markdown', and clarifies suitability 'for LLM context'. Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like web_search (search results) and research (deeper investigation).

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?

Description implies use when a specific URL's content is needed, but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. Sibling tools exist (web_search, research) but no mention of their differentiation.

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