抓取網頁

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

無 annotations，描述承擔行為揭露責任。它披露了拒絕本機/私網地址這項安全相關行為，並提及分頁限制，但未說明輸出格式、速率限制或潛在副作用。行為揭露不夠完整。

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?

描述精簡，一句話即涵蓋核心功能、模式、分頁及安全限制。資訊密度高，但分號分隔的句子讀來略顯緊湊，仍有提升空間。

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?

工具簡單，無輸出 schema，描述已覆蓋主要面向：URL 類型、模式、分頁、限制。雖未提及返回格式，但對於此類讀取工具，資訊已足夠。

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 描述覆蓋率為 0%，描述必須補償。它清楚解釋了 mode 的兩種取值（readable=抽正文、source=原文），並提及 offset/limit 的有界分頁，為參數提供了重要語義。但未詳細描述 limit/offset 的具體效果，略有不足。

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?

描述明確指出工具讀取公開 HTTP(S) URL，並區分兩種模式（readable/source）及分頁行為。與兄弟工具（如 web_search）功能不同，能清楚分辨用途。

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?

描述說明了工具用途（讀取網頁）及限制（拒絕本機/私網），但未明確說明何時不應使用或建議替代方案。使用情境隱含，但沒有明確的排除條件或對比。

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