browser_select_option

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly. It reveals the click-trigger-wait-click mechanism for custom dropdowns, the matching priority (exact value, exact text, partial text), and the failure behavior of failing loudly rather than falsely succeeding. This is strong behavioral disclosure.

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 compact, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence adds distinct value: scope, mechanism, and sibling differentiation. There is no filler or redundancy.

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?

Despite having no annotations and no output schema, the description provides enough context to call the tool correctly: target element types, the exact interaction flow, matching behavior, and the relevant alternative. The complexity of supporting both native and custom dropdowns is well covered.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds some useful behavioral context around how option matching is performed, but it does not add meaningfully to the parameter definitions already present in the schema, which are detailed and sufficient.

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?

Description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Select an option from a dropdown menu.' It clearly distinguishes native <select> handling from custom dropdown frameworks and explicitly points to browser_set_combobox for autocomplete cases, separating it from siblings.

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 concrete when-to-use guidance by covering both native and custom dropdowns, and explicitly states when NOT to use it: 'For autocomplete (typing filters options) use browser_set_combobox instead.' This leaves little ambiguity about tool selection.

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