page_html

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. The description only states 'returns complete HTML' and reveals nothing about performance cost, whether it reflects post-JavaScript DOM or raw source, whether page must be fully loaded, or what happens if the page is a PDF or other non-HTML type.

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?

Extremely concise — a single line that states the function signature and return type. No wasted words for a tool with no parameters and a simple output.

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 tool with no params and no output schema, the description should clarify what '完整 HTML' means in context — is this the serialized DOM after JS execution, or the original response body? Given siblings like get_response_body and get_markdown exist, the description doesn't sufficiently clarify the semantic difference for an agent to pick correctly.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100% (empty properties). With no params to document, there's nothing for the description to add beyond confirming no arguments are needed, which the arrow notation implicitly conveys. Baseline 4 for 0-param tools is appropriate.

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 name 'page_html' with description 'page_html() → 完整 HTML' implies it returns complete HTML of the current page. This is moderately clear but could be confused with siblings like page_text, get_markdown, page_info — the description doesn't distinguish it from these alternatives.

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?

No guidance on when to use this vs alternatives like page_text (plain text), get_markdown (markdown rendering), or get_response_body (raw network response). No context about requirements (e.g., must wait for load, works only on current tab).

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