get_page_html

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

The description discloses the 500KB truncation limit, which is useful. However, it does not mention if the tool has side effects, requires permissions, or handles errors (e.g., invalid selectors). With no annotations, the description carries full burden but falls short on these aspects.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, no fluff, and the key functionality is front-loaded.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior and the critical truncation detail. It could mention error handling and return format, but is largely adequate.

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 the parameter description is already clear. The tool description adds minimal additional semantic value, mainly restating the schema's information.

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 retrieves full page HTML or a specific element's HTML, with a truncation limit. This is distinct from sibling tools like get_network_requests or get_screenshot.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as query_dom for DOM queries or get_screenshot for visual capture. The description implies usage but does not explicitly exclude other tools.

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