crawl_page

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions extraction of interactive elements but does not discuss read-only nature, error handling, timeouts, or potential side effects. The lack of detail leaves some transparency gaps.

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 long, with the first defining the action and the second providing usage guidance. Every word is necessary and impactful, with no extraneous content.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no nested objects, no output schema), the description covers the essential: what it does and when to use it. It lacks detail on output format or error behavior, but for a straightforward crawling tool, it is nearly complete.

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?

There is only one parameter (url) with 100% schema description coverage. The tool description adds context that the URL is for crawling, but does not provide additional semantic meaning beyond the schema's 'The full URL of the webpage to crawl.' Baseline score applies.

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 verb 'Crawl' and the resource 'a webpage', and specifies it extracts interactive elements like inputs, buttons, links with locators. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by saying 'Always call this first before writing a test.'

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 a clear usage directive: 'Always call this first before writing a test.' This implies it is a prerequisite for write_test and run_test. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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