browser_uncheck

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only states 'uncheck' without revealing any behavioral traits such as whether it waits for the element, what happens if the element is already unchecked, or whether it throws errors on missing elements. This is completely opaque for a browser interaction tool.

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 short (three characters) but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It does not earn its place because it adds no information beyond the tool name. A concise but informative sentence like 'Uncheck a checkbox or radio button identified by CSS selector' would be appropriate.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description still needs to explain the behavior, the selector's purpose, and expected outcomes. This description provides none of that, leaving the agent without enough information to invoke the tool correctly or handle errors.

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 input schema has one required 'selector' parameter with no description (schema coverage 0%). The tool description does not explain what the selector selects or the expected format (e.g., CSS selector). The parameter semantics are entirely left to the parameter name 'selector', which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 '取消勾选' translates to 'Uncheck', which is a direct restatement of the tool name 'browser_uncheck'. It simply repeats the action without specifying the resource (e.g., checkbox/radio button) or the context, failing to add any clarity beyond the name itself.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like browser_check, nor any mention of prerequisites, target element types, or conditions that must be met. The description provides zero usage context.

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