metadata_extract

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral context; it usefully discloses that relative URLs are resolved against the post-redirect final URL and that SSRF safety is enforced across initial and redirect hops. However, it does not cover other relevant behavior such as error handling, timeouts, caching, or content-type restrictions.

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?

The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded: the first line states the core action, followed by compact supporting details about extracted fields and URL/SSRF behavior. Every sentence adds useful information without repetition.

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?

For a one-parameter extraction tool with an output schema, the description supplies the key operational context: what is extracted, how relative URLs are handled, and SSRF enforcement. It is nearly complete, though sibling differentiation and URL validation constraints are missing.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate more for the single url parameter. It implies the input is a web page URL and mentions redirect handling and SSRF checks, but it does not specify allowed schemes, URL constraints, or what happens when the URL is invalid or blocked.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: extract metadata from a web page. It enumerates the metadata types extracted, making the purpose clear, but it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from close siblings such as web_extract or web_fetch.

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 implies the tool is for extracting structured metadata from a page, but it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or comparison against siblings like web_extract, web_fetch, or web_search.

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