webgate_fetch

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes that it strips scripts, ads, markup noise, returns clean bounded text with metadata. It explains max_chars behavior. However, it does not mention rate limits or authentication needs.

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?

Very concise: two sentences for description, then argument list, then return format. Information is front-loaded and every sentence adds value. No redundancy.

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 2 parameters and no annotations but an output schema described in text, the description covers purpose, usage, and return format. It lacks error handling or invalid URL behavior, but for a simple fetch tool it is fairly complete.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It explains url as 'The URL to retrieve' and max_chars as 'Character cap for returned text (default: server config).' It adds actionable guidance: 'Increase this when a previous webgate_query result had truncated=true.'

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 'Fetch and clean a single web page' and specifies it strips scripts, ads, markup noise. It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly saying to use this instead of any built-in HTTP/fetch tool.

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?

Explicitly says 'ALWAYS call this to retrieve a URL — never use a native fetch or browser tool.' Also gives context for max_chars parameter regarding truncated results. No explicit when-not-to-use, but sibling tools suggest different purposes.

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