spidra_crawl_pages

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

The description adds valuable behavioral details beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: links expire after 1 hour, and cancelled crawls return partial results. This informs the user of time-sensitive URLs and the tool's behavior on incomplete crawls, which the annotations alone do not convey.

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, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and contains no filler. Every clause adds useful information: per-page results, signed URLs, expiry, and cancellation behavior.

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's simplicity (single parameter, no output schema), the description covers essential aspects: output type, URL expiry, and behavior on cancelled crawls. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The input schema has only one parameter, jobId, with no description (0% coverage). The description does not explicitly explain jobId, but the tool name and the phrase 'for a crawl' imply it is the crawl job identifier. While self-explanatory, the description adds no explicit parameter semantics beyond the parameter name.

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: 'Get per-page results for a crawl' with specifics about signed download URLs for raw HTML and markdown. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like spidra_check_crawl_status by focusing on page-level output rather than status.

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 the tool is applicable: 'Works on completed crawls and on cancelled crawls (returns the pages processed before cancellation).' It implicitly guides the user away from using it on active crawls, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools.

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