browser_get_links

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

With no annotations supplied, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'get all links' without explaining what is included (e.g., hidden or dynamic links), how the result is structured, or whether any side effects occur. This is a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 extremely concise with no wasted words, but it borders on under-specification. It is a single phrase that lacks structure or detail, which is not ideal for a tool in a large sibling group.

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 the tool's simplicity (no params, no output schema), the description should still clarify what 'links' refer to and what the return value looks like. The current description leaves too much to interpretation, making it incomplete for an AI agent to use reliably.

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, so according to the baseline for 0-param tools, a score of 4 is appropriate. The description adds minimal extra meaning, but since there are no parameters to clarify, it does not need to go further.

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 '获取所有链接' (Get all links) clearly states a specific action of retrieving links, which is distinct from most sibling tools. However, it does not specify the scope (e.g., current page) or the format of the links returned, leaving some ambiguity.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like browser_get_by_text or browser_get_attribute are not referenced, and the description does not mention any context or exclusions.

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