Scrape as Markdown

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

Beyond the readOnly/openWorld/idempotent annotations, the description discloses the three-tier fetch strategy (direct free, headless browser free, Bright Data billed only on block) and that a note after the result identifies which path was used. The truncation/pagination behavior is also spelled out, which is exactly the kind of cost and output behavior annotations cannot convey.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then cost behavior, then pagination and format tips. Every sentence carries distinct information with no repetitive restatement of the title.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries return-value burden and does explain the post-result note and pagination offsets. Minor gap: it says 'returned offset' while the schema field is next_offset, and it doesn't describe the shape of the Markdown payload beyond 'compact'.

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 83%, so the schema already documents nearly every parameter, including format, offset, fresh, and max_chars. The description adds only the format=raw recommendation and the offset-retry loop, which is marginal value over structured data. The 3 baseline applies.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource — 'Fetch one web page and return it as compact Markdown' — and the 'one web page' scope implicitly separates it from scrape_batch. It doesn't explicitly name siblings like scrape_as_html or extract, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

It gives clear operational guidance: use format=raw for unprocessed Markdown, and call again with the returned offset when a page is truncated. It also explains the fetch cost ladder, which tells an agent what to expect. It stops short of saying when to prefer scrape_as_html or extract over this tool.

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