Read web page as Markdown

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond that: content extraction strips boilerplate/nav/ads and the response includes a title and token count, which tells the agent what it actually receives.

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?

Three short sentences with the core behavior front-loaded and no filler. Tight and appropriately sized for a simple fetch tool, though the last sentence could be folded in without loss.

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 read-only fetch tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, transformation behavior, and returned fields. Gaps remain around truncation/size limits, JS-rendered page handling, and failure behavior, but these are not blocking for correct 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and every parameter is documented with defaults, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only echoes the markdown/text output distinction (omitting the json enum value) and adds no syntax or format guidance beyond what the schema provides — baseline 3.

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?

States a specific verb (fetch) and resource (web page) plus the transformation applied: main content returned as clean Markdown with boilerplate, nav and ads stripped. It does not name or contrast the siblings (chunk_url, convert_html, page_metadata), so an agent gets the what but not the differentiation.

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?

"Use for reading articles, docs and blog posts" gives a usable context, but there are no exclusions and no routing to alternatives such as chunk_url for oversized pages or convert_html for raw HTML. Usage is implied rather than scoped.

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