browser_is_visible

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It does not disclose the return format (e.g., boolean), whether it waits for visibility, what happens if the element is not found, or any side effects. The behavioral traits are entirely opaque beyond the basic action.

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 a single short sentence, highly concise and front-loaded. Every word earns its place, with no extraneous information.

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 this is a simple tool, the complete absence of behavioral details (return value, exceptions, waiting behavior) and lack of output schema make the description inadequate. The agent cannot fully predict the tool's behavior or interpret results.

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% and the description does not elaborate on the 'selector' parameter. The agent is left with only the parameter name and type, with no explanation of what constitutes a valid selector or how it relates to visibility checking.

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 '检查元素可见性' (Check element visibility) uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the tool checks element visibility. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like browser_is_enabled and browser_is_checked.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It simply states the action without context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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