extract_links

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behaviors. It mentions URL resolution and same-domain filtering but omits critical details like error handling, performance impact of 'render' modes, or what happens if no links are found.

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?

Two sentences covering the core purpose and optional restriction. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with the main action.

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?

Missing output schema and no description of return format. Behavioral and edge-case details (e.g., empty results, error states) are absent. Sibling differentiation is adequate but incomplete for an agent to fully assess suitability.

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% with detailed descriptions. The description adds value by explaining 'resolved to absolute URLs' and 'restrict to same domain', but doesn't go beyond the schema's own documentation significantly.

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 it extracts hyperlinks from a web page, resolves them to absolute URLs, and optionally restricts to same domain. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like crawl_site (multi-page) and extract_by_selector (CSS-based).

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 links from a single page but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this vs. siblings (e.g., craw_site for multiple pages). No mention of prerequisites or when not to use.

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