crawl_site

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only reveals that the tool returns a job_id, implying asynchronous operation, but does not detail side effects on the target site, rate limits, or how to retrieve results. This is minimal disclosure for a crawl operation.

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 two short sentences with no fluff: the first states the action and return value, the second gives the trigger. It is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description lacks parameter semantics, behavioral details, and explicit alternative comparisons. With four parameters and no description coverage, this is insufficient for safe and correct invocation, especially since the tool likely starts long-running crawl jobs.

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%, and the description provides zero explanation of parameters like strategy, max_depth, or max_pages. The agent is left without any guidance on how to set these parameters correctly, making the tool difficult to invoke properly.

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 performs '深度爬取整个网站' (deep crawl entire website) and returns 'job_id', distinguishing it from single-page tools like scrape_url by its entire-site scope. However, it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, so differentiation is implicit rather than explicit.

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 gives an explicit trigger: '当用户要求采集整个网站或栏目时使用' (use when user requests to collect the entire website or section). This provides clear usage context, but it does not mention when not to use the tool or point to alternative tools for other scenarios.

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