spider_ai_scrape

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the AI subscription requirement and the return format (structured JSON). However, it does not mention potential side effects like credit consumption, rate limits, or behavior on failure, which would be useful for a scraping tool. The description gives some key context but is not comprehensive.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences that are front-loaded with the core purpose. It includes the essential subscription warning without unnecessary fluff, making it efficient and well-structured.

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 tool with 6 parameters and a sibling (spider_scrape) that serves a similar function, the description is somewhat brief. It explains the AI-based approach and the subscription requirement but does not elaborate on output formats, limitations, or explicit comparison to non-AI scraping. The schema fills in parameter details, so overall completeness is moderate.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description indirectly references the 'prompt' parameter ('Describe what data you want'), but it does not add significant meaning beyond the schema. It is adequate but not enhanced.

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 function: 'AI-powered structured data extraction using plain English' and mentions it returns structured JSON without CSS selectors. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like spider_scrape, which likely requires selectors.

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 clear context for when to use this tool: when you want to describe data in plain English rather than writing CSS selectors. It also mentions the prerequisite of an AI subscription. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is sufficient.

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