Get web page metadata

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds a genuine behavioral trait — it avoids retrieving full page content, i.e. it is the lightweight metadata-only path — and enumerates the returned shape in the absence of an output schema. It stops short of noting error behavior for invalid/non-HTML URLs or redirect handling.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the action and resource first, followed by the field enumeration that legitimately earns its space because no output schema documents the return shape. No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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 one-parameter, read-only, open-world fetch tool with no output schema, the description covers what it returns and what it deliberately omits (full content). It is not fully complete only in that it says nothing about failure modes for unreachable or non-HTML URLs.

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 exists and schema description coverage is 100% (absolute http(s) URL, max 2048 chars), so the schema carries the semantics. The description adds nothing about URL format, redirects, or trailing-slash handling beyond what is already structured, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb ('Get') + resource ('a web page's metadata') with an explicit enumeration of the fields returned, and the phrase 'without the full content' implicitly separates it from the sibling read_url. An agent can distinguish it from read_url, chunk_url, and convert_html without opening any schema.

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 phrase 'without the full content' clearly signals the intended context: use this when only page metadata is needed rather than the body text. However, it never names read_url as the alternative or states an explicit when-not condition, so the routing is inferred rather than spelled out.

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