web_read

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'clean content' and 'up to 20 URLs', but fails to disclose credit costs (only hinted in parameter descriptions), rate limits, authentication requirements, side effects, or error handling. This is a significant gap for a web 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 extremely concise at two sentences, with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose and then adds a key output characteristic and a constraint. 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 the tool's complexity (3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequate but leaves gaps. It does not explain credit costs, the difference between basic/advanced extraction beyond schema, or return value format. Important behavioral aspects are missing, making it incomplete for an agent to use optimally.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds high-level context about the tool's output, but does not significantly enhance the parameter meanings beyond what the schema already provides. The schema descriptions for extractDepth and includeImages are detailed, so the description adds little extra 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Extract clean content from web pages.' It specifies the verb 'extract' and the resource 'content from web pages', and distinguishes itself from siblings like web_search by focusing on extracting content from given URLs rather than searching.

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 implies usage for extracting content from specific URLs, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like web_search. It lacks explicit 'when-not-to-use' guidance or mention of prerequisites, though the context of sibling tools provides some implicit differentiation.

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