mobbin_extract

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses filtering behavior ('Mobbin-specific filtering' for links, 'design-relevant image filtering') and the text preview, giving transparency into what the tool returns. It does not mention side effects or auth requirements, but for a read-only extraction tool this is sufficient.

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 sentences and entirely efficient. It front-loads the purpose, lists return content, and ends with usage context. No filler or 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?

For a zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully compensates by enumerating the return categories. It gives enough detail for an agent to understand what it will receive and when to invoke the tool. The only minor gap is the vague 'Mobbin-specific filtering,' but this is not essential for selection or invocation.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the input schema is trivially fully covered. The description does not need to explain parameters. Per the rubric, a baseline of 4 is appropriate when there are no params.

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 function with a specific verb and resource: 'Extract structured data from the current Mobbin page.' It enumerates the exact return contents (page type, headings, links, images, text preview), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like mobbin_screenshot.

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 last sentence, 'Use this to understand page content without taking a screenshot,' provides clear guidance on when to use the tool and contrasts it with the screenshot alternative. It does not explicitly list exclusion criteria or other alternatives, but the context is clear enough.

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