get_usage_guide

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 states the tool returns a workflow, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects, rate limits, or whether it requires authentication. However, as a read-only guide, its behavior is relatively simple.

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 with no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose and provides a clear usage scenario. Every sentence earns its place.

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 could elaborate on what the guided workflow includes (e.g., tool list, sequence steps). It only says 'complete guided workflow', which is adequate but not fully descriptive for an agent to set expectations.

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 no parameters, so the input schema provides full coverage. The description does not need to add parameter information. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4.

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 returns a 'complete guided workflow' for using scrapedatshi tools. It specifies the action ('returns') and the resource ('guided workflow'), and distinguishes itself from sibling action tools by being a meta-guide.

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 explicitly advises to call it 'at the start of any scrapedatshi conversation' and explains why (to understand tool selection and pre-flight sequence). It does not mention alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to know when to invoke it.

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