fetch_extract

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

No annotations exist, so description fully discloses behavior: no JavaScript execution, deterministic, parallel-safe, zero-setup, cost details, and benchmark efficiency. It also notes error detection without charge, ensuring the agent understands limitations.

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 relatively long but well-structured, starting with main purpose, then benchmarks, then usage notes. Each sentence adds value, though some benchmark details could be condensed. Overall effective communication.

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 no output schema and only 2 parameters, the description covers purpose, behavior, usage guidance, and cost. It could mention return format implicitly, but for a straightforward tool it is fairly complete.

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 coverage is 100% with good descriptions for both parameters. The description adds context about default/max for maxChars and stripping behavior, but does not add substantial new semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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?

The description clearly states the tool fetches a URL and returns clean text stripped of HTML, etc. It distinguishes from siblings like fetch_html and screenshot_url, making its purpose specific and distinct.

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?

Explicitly notes when not to use (client-side-rendered SPAs) and provides alternatives (screenshot_url, fetch_html). It also mentions error handling without charging for unsupported pages, giving clear guidance on suitability.

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