Scrape URL

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. Description adds that output can be markdown, HTML, or links, but does not disclose details like fetch behavior, rate limits, or auth requirements. Given good annotation coverage, the description provides minimal additional behavioral context.

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?

Single short sentence. Front-loaded with action and key information. No filler. However, could be slightly more descriptive without becoming verbose.

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?

Description is very brief for a tool with 9 parameters and no output schema. Does not cover what the output structure looks like, error handling, or behavior for invalid URLs. Agents may need to infer or experiment. Annotations provide some safety context but description lacks depth.

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?

Input schema covers all 9 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description adds no extra meaning beyond listing output formats; it does not explain parameters like 'excludeTags', 'renderJs', etc. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since schema already documents parameters.

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?

Description clearly states the tool scrapes a single URL into specified formats (markdown, HTML, links). Contrasts with sibling tools: crw_crawl for crawling multiple pages, crw_map for mapping, crw_check_crawl_status for status, crw_parse_file for parsing files. Verb and resource are explicit, and output formats are listed.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Does not state that it is for single-URL scraping only, nor does it mention when to use crw_crawl for multiple URLs or crw_map. Agent has to infer usage from name and sibling set.

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