Scrape Web Page

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and safety cues. The description adds valuable behavioral context: handles JavaScript rendering, anti-bot bypass, proxy rotation, and returns LLM-ready output. It does not contradict annotations. Minor omission: no mention of potential errors or rate limits.

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?

Three sentences with front-loaded main action and key features. The marketing sentence ('Cheapest web scraper...') is slightly extraneous but does not significantly harm conciseness. Efficient overall.

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 presence of an output schema and rich annotations, the description covers core behavior (scraping, rendering, output formats) adequately. It lacks details on edge cases (e.g., large pages, blocking) but is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's purpose and basic 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 coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already well-documented. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema (e.g., format types are listed in schema). No new constraints or usage tips for 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?

The description clearly states the tool scrapes any web page and returns clean content in multiple formats (markdown, text, raw HTML). It specifies unique capabilities like JavaScript rendering, anti-bot bypass, and proxy rotation, distinguishing it from generic scraping tools. The verb+resource ('Scrape any web page') is specific and unambiguous.

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 on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'web.scrape.extract' or 'scraping.spider.search'. The description does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or scenarios where alternatives would be better. It lacks explicit usage context.

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