extract_urls

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'Python web crawler', implying network requests, but lacks details on rate limiting, robots.txt respect, or potential impact. This is partially transparent but insufficient for a crawl tool.

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 with a clear purpose statement, structured Args section, and a practical example. Every sentence contributes meaning with no redundancy.

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?

The description lacks information about return value format and error behavior. Given no output schema and the complexity of web crawling, this is a notable gap. However, it does cover parameters and provides a usage example.

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 0%, so the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: url as target URL, depth with default, and user_agent as optional. The example further clarifies usage, adding significant value beyond the raw schema.

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 extracts all URLs from a website using a Python web crawler. This is a specific verb-resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like whois_info or dns_records.

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 URLs but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use or avoid this tool. No alternative tools are suggested, but the sibling list shows it is the only URL extraction tool.

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