render.extract_dom

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden but only states the basic action without disclosing behavioral traits. It doesn't mention potential side effects (e.g., network requests, rendering overhead), authentication needs, rate limits, or error handling, leaving significant gaps for a tool that interacts with external webpages.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and wastes no space, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 complexity of extracting DOM from webpages, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the returned DOM structure includes (e.g., HTML format, depth), error scenarios, or dependencies, leaving the agent with incomplete context for effective use.

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 the schema already documents both parameters ('url' and 'waitTime') adequately. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining the DOM extraction process or format, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 action ('extract and return') and resource ('DOM structure of a webpage'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'render.extract_forms' or 'render.screenshot' that also operate on webpages, missing explicit distinction.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'render.extract_forms' for form extraction or 'render.screenshot' for visual capture. The description lacks context about use cases or prerequisites, offering no help in tool selection.

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