Scrapfly Quick Page Fetch Tool

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds context about 'sane defaults' and the speed focus ('fast'), which provides useful behavioral context beyond annotations. However, it doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, or other operational constraints.

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 just two sentences, with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by specific usage instructions. Every sentence earns its place by providing essential guidance that isn't covered elsewhere.

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 complex tool with 10 parameters, 100% schema coverage, comprehensive annotations, and an output schema (implied by context signals), the description provides adequate context. It covers purpose and usage guidelines well, though it could better differentiate from sibling tools and provide more behavioral context about limitations or performance characteristics.

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 schema fully documents all 10 parameters. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the full parameter documentation burden.

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 as 'Quick page fetch with sane defaults' which indicates it retrieves web page content efficiently. It specifies the verb 'fetch' and resource 'page', but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'web_scrape' or 'screenshot' beyond the 'quick' qualifier. The purpose is clear but sibling differentiation is incomplete.

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 explicit usage guidance: 'Use tool scraping_instruction_enhanced before using this tool' establishes a prerequisite, and 'Use when you just need the content fast' gives clear context for when to choose this tool. This directly addresses when to use it versus alternatives, though it doesn't explicitly name sibling tools.

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