web_extract

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

With no annotations provided, the description adds value by disclosing that responses preserve bounded-context limits, truncation warnings, evidence, and page-on-demand references. It does not explicitly state read-only nature but the output behavior is well described.

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 consists of two succinct sentences. The first states the core function, the second lists output characteristics. No extraneous 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 8 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description covers the tool's output behavior but omits parameter usage context and explicit guidance on when to use each option. The sibling tool provides some context but not enough for full completeness.

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 only 38%, and the description does not provide any additional meaning for parameters like 'spans', 'format', or 'render_js'. The description focuses on output behavior, leaving parameter semantics largely to 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 'Source-only URL extraction' using specific providers, distinguishing from the sibling tool 'web_search' which is for searching. It specifies the verb and resource unambiguously.

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 provided URLs via the phrase 'source-only URL extraction', contrasting with search. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternate scenarios, leaving some inference required.

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