firecrawl_crawl

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the description need only add context, and it adds none. It omits that this kicks off an asynchronous crawl job (a firecrawl_crawl_status sibling exists for polling), that pages/credits are consumed, and that a limit defaults to 10000.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly under-specification rather than true economy.

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?

For a 19-parameter, open-world, non-read-only crawl tool with no output schema, the description is far too thin. It says nothing about asynchronous job behavior, polling via crawl_status, scope controls (allowSubdomains, includePaths), or cost, all of which an agent needs to call 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the 19 parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description contributes no additional parameter meaning, which is the baseline-3 case when the schema carries the load.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'recursively crawl a website and scrape each discovered page.' The word 'recursively' and 'each discovered page' implicitly distinguish it from the single-page firecrawl_scrape sibling, but no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Provides no when-to-use guidance, no conditions selecting it over firecrawl_scrape, firecrawl_map, or firecrawl_extract, and no prerequisites. The agent must infer usage purely from the verb.

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