agent-tool

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses key behavioral traits: HTML-to-Markdown conversion (with opt-out via 'raw'), security features (ECH/DoH, SSRF protection), network configuration (proxy support, Chrome User-Agent), and privacy defaults. Missing minor details like redirect handling or cookie behavior.

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?

Exceptionally dense and structured. Every sentence conveys distinct information: core function, format conversion, security features, proxy support, SSRF protection, User-Agent, headers, and sibling differentiation. No redundancy or filler.

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?

Comprehensive for an 8-parameter tool with no output schema. Covers return format, security constraints, proxy capabilities, and sibling alternatives. Minor gap regarding error handling or redirect behavior, but sufficient 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%, establishing baseline 3. Description adds value by explaining the logic behind negative boolean parameters (no_doh/no_ech) through 'enabled by default' framing, and contextualizes headers/proxy params within security/privacy features rather than just mechanical descriptions.

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?

Description opens with specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('content from a URL'), explicitly states output format ('return it as text'), and clearly distinguishes from sibling 'download' tool ('For downloading binary files, use the download tool instead').

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?

Provides explicit when-not-to-use guidance ('For downloading binary files...') and names the specific alternative tool ('use the download tool instead'). Also implies primary use case through HTML-to-Markdown conversion mention.

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