list_available_scrapers

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: it reads the in-process registry, covers built-ins and self-registering third-party plugins, performs no network/browser access, changes no state, and returns an empty list when none are registered. This is exemplary transparency for a read-only discovery 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 well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by implementation detail, safety guarantees, return format, and usage guidance. Every sentence contributes meaningful information without redundancy.

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 zero parameters and no annotations, the description covers all necessary context: what the tool does, how it works, side effects (none), return value, examples, and workflow integration with scrape_with. It is fully self-sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to explain beyond the schema. The description instead adds value by clarifying return semantics (list of strings, example values, empty-list behavior), which is appropriate and supports a baseline-above score.

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 opens with 'List every scraper registered with this server and return their names for use with scrape_with,' which uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing this discovery tool from scraping/sibling tools. The scope ('registered with this server') and the complementary reference to scrape_with make the purpose unambiguous.

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 'Usage Guidelines' section explicitly instructs calling this tool first, passing returned names to scrape_with, and using it to confirm plugin registration. This provides clear when-to-use guidance and a direct workflow with its primary sibling tool.

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