fetch_page

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the output format (markdown with metadata) and the js_render option, but does not explain potential limitations like handling non-HTML content, error behavior, or rate limits. The disclosure is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 concise, front-loaded sentences with no wasted words. Every part contributes useful information, making it easy to scan and understand.

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 simple two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the core behavior and provides usage guidance. It lacks details on edge cases or limitations, but the presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values. Overall, it is suitably complete for its complexity.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaningful semantics for js_render by explaining when to enable it, and while url is self-explanatory, the description still provides clear value for the key parameter.

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 fetches one web page and returns clean markdown with metadata. The verb 'Fetch' and resource 'one web page' precisely describe the action, distinguishing it from siblings like fetch_pages (plural) and crawl_site.

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 description provides clear context by specifying it fetches a single page, implying when to use it versus multi-page alternatives. It also gives explicit guidance on when to set js_render=true for JavaScript-dependent pages, which is useful usage context.

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