scrape_with

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and does so thoroughly: it reveals that args are forwarded to scrape(), return shape is scraper-specific, side effects (network, auth, browser rendering) vary by target, unknown names throw an error, and empty results return the scraper's empty structure. This comprehensively sets expectations.

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 front-loaded with the core action and uses four additional sentences that each earn their place: dispatch logic, return shape, side-effect caveat, and error/empty behavior. No filler or repetition.

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 generic dispatcher with 2 params and an output schema, the description is complete. It explains the dispatch mechanism, return variability, side effects, failures, and empty results—without needing to describe return values in detail since an output schema exists.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no significant meaning beyond the schema: 'name' is the registry name, 'args' are forwarded to scrape(). The schema already states both, so the description provides minimal added value.

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 a specific verb+resource: 'Run any registered scraper... by name and return that scraper's raw scrape() output.' It clearly distinguishes this generic dispatcher from the sibling-specific scrapers and list_available_scrapers by framing it as the entry point for scrapers lacking a dedicated tool.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'This is the generic dispatch entry point for scrapers that lack a dedicated tool, notably third-party plugins.' This implies the when-not-to-use (use dedicated tools when available) and describes the alternative conceptual category, giving clear context.

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