web_fetch_chunked

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states that the tool returns 'chunk content plus metadata about total chunks available', which is a key behavioral trait. It does not mention any destructive actions or side effects, which is appropriate for a read-only fetch tool.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and no wasted words. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given no output schema, the description explains the return value (chunk content + metadata). It lacks details on error handling or boundary conditions, but it is sufficient for a straightforward paginated fetch tool.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add significant semantic information beyond what the schema already provides for the 4 parameters (url, chunk, chunk_size, timeout).

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 large documents in chunks' and 'paginated reading of large docs', which specifies the verb (fetch), resource (large documents), and the chunking mechanism that distinguishes it from sibling tools like web_fetch_code or web_fetch_links.

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 says 'Use for paginated reading of large docs', providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives among siblings, though the context implies it for large documents.

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