structextract

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

The description includes a cost annotation ('[$0.002 USDC]') which is a behavioral trait. However, no annotations are provided, and the description does not mention other behaviors like destructive actions, authentication, or rate limits. It partially fulfills the burden with cost info.

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 a single sentence that includes cost, purpose, and list of extractables. Every word is informative, and it is front-loaded with the most critical information. No fluff.

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?

The description covers the basic purpose and extractable items but lacks details on the output JSON structure, error handling, or edge cases. Given no output schema, the description should ideally describe the return format more thoroughly.

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?

The input schema has 2 parameters with 0% schema description coverage. The description lists the enum values for the 'extract' parameter (tables, links, etc.), adding meaning beyond the schema. However, it does not describe the 'html' parameter beyond being 'raw HTML', leaving some gap.

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 verb 'Extract' and the resource 'structured JSON from raw HTML', listing specific extractable elements (tables, links, etc.). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like scrapepay or web_synthesise that may have different focuses.

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 vs. alternatives. Sibling tools such as scrapepay or web_synthesise are not mentioned, and there is no indication of when not to use this tool.

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