crw_crawl

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It correctly notes async behavior and returns a job ID, but does not disclose details about rate limits, robots.txt handling, error reporting, or concurrency limits. This leaves gaps for an AI agent to infer safe usage.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main action. Every word adds value—no fluff. Perfectly concise for a core tool.

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 7 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and return value. It omits context on parameter interactions (e.g., renderJs vs renderer) but the schema descriptions partially fill that gap. Slightly incomplete for complex configurations.

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 input schema already documents all 7 parameters well. The description adds no additional explanation beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Start an async crawl of a website,' which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like crw_check_crawl_status by mentioning polling, and from crw_map, crw_scrape, crw_search by implying a multi-page crawl.

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 explicitly mentions polling with crw_check_crawl_status, giving clear after-use guidance. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or comparisons with crw_map/crw_scrape, but the async nature implies it's for deep crawling, not single-page scraping.

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