scrape_multiple

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well by disclosing key behavioral traits: it's a batch operation, returns specific data (title and excerpt), and has fault-tolerant error handling. It doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, or performance characteristics, but covers the essential behavior adequately for a read-only scraping 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 perfectly concise with two sentences that each earn their place: the first states the core functionality and output, the second explains the error handling behavior. No wasted words, front-loaded with the most important information.

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 moderate complexity (batch scraping with partial failure tolerance), no annotations, and no output schema, the description provides good context about what the tool does and how it behaves. It could be more complete by specifying output format details or limitations, but covers the essential aspects well for an agent to use it 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 schema description coverage is 100% with the 'urls' parameter fully documented as 'Array of URLs to scrape'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, but doesn't need to since the schema is complete. This meets the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 specific action ('Batch scrape multiple URLs') and the resource ('URLs'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'scrape_url' (single URL) and 'extract_links'/'extract_metadata' (different extraction types). It explicitly mentions what it returns ('title and excerpt for each'), making 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 description provides clear context for when to use this tool: for batch processing of URLs where partial failures are acceptable ('Failures are reported per URL without failing the whole batch'). However, it doesn't explicitly mention when NOT to use it or name alternatives like 'scrape_url' for single URLs, which would have earned a 5.

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