batch_scrape

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true (safe read) and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral details: parallel execution, concurrency control (maxConcurrency), and trade-offs between sync and async modes. It does not mention potential failures or rate limits, but annotations cover the safety profile.

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: two sentences plus an example. Every sentence adds value, with the first sentence defining purpose and the second providing mode guidance. The example is practical and demonstrates key parameters.

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 the tool's complexity (11 parameters, nested objects), the description covers the essential decision (sync vs async) and constraints (batch size, concurrency). It lacks detail on response format or error handling, but these are partially covered by annotations and schema. Overall, it provides sufficient context for correct tool selection.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema itself explains all parameters adequately. The description provides an example call that illustrates usage of 'urls', 'formats', and 'maxConcurrency', but does not add significant semantic value beyond what is in the schema.

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's purpose: scraping 2–50 URLs in parallel, with specific use cases (product pages, news articles, competitor pages). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on batch processing and gives example scenarios, making the tool's role 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 description provides explicit guidance on when to use sync vs async modes, with concrete thresholds (async for large batches, sync for up to ~25 URLs for immediate results). It does not explicitly exclude alternatives for single URLs, but the context implies a distinction from single-URL tools like fetch_url.

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