summarize

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the fetch-and-summarize behavior, chunking for large pages, configurable strategy, and return type. It does not mention error handling or rate limits, but for a read-only tool this is adequate.

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?

Concise single paragraph of 6 sentences. Front-loaded with main purpose, followed by details and parameters. Every sentence adds value without 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?

Covers main behavior (fetch, chunk, summarize, config strategy) and return type. Output schema exists but is not shown; description simply says 'plain-text summary'. Could mention error handling, but sufficient for typical use.

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 0%, meaning the schema has no descriptions. The description compensates by defining each parameter: url (mandatory), question (optional, focusing summary), user_id (optional, same as fetch). This adds crucial semantics.

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 'Fetch a webpage and return a concise summary of it.' It distinguishes from sibling 'extract' by contrasting free-form summary vs. named fields, and explains the chunking/combining strategy for large pages.

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 instructs: 'Use this tool when the user wants a free-form summary of a page, or an answer to an open question about a long page, rather than a fixed set of named fields (use extract for named fields).' This provides clear when-to-use and alternative.

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