spider_ai_scrape

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool uses AI and requires a subscription, and that output is 'clean JSON'. However, it omits behavioral details such as rate limits, error handling, authentication method beyond the subscription link, or what constitutes a failed extraction.

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 two sentences long, front-loading the core purpose and key differentiator (plain English, no CSS selectors). Every sentence provides necessary information without extraneous detail.

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 tool has no output schema, the description effectively states the return format ('clean JSON back'). It also notes the subscription requirement. However, it could briefly mention that the tool returns structured JSON based on the prompt, and it lacks guidance on expected output structure or error scenarios. Overall, it is mostly complete for a straightforward scraping tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no additional semantic information beyond the schema; it reiterates the 'plain English' concept for the prompt parameter but doesn't elaborate on other parameters like cookies, request type, or return format. The schema already adequately describes each parameter.

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 'Extract structured data from a page using plain English' and promises 'clean JSON back', specifying the verb, resource, and output format. The name distinguishes it as AI-powered, but it does not explicitly contrast with the sibling tool 'spider_scrape', though the AI mention implies the difference.

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 indicates when to use: for structured data extraction with plain English. It also mentions the requirement of an active AI subscription. However, it does not specify when not to use this tool (e.g., if you need raw HTML or non-AI extraction) or explicitly name alternatives like 'spider_scrape' for non-AI cases.

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