query_selector_cdp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It accurately describes the two main phases (fetch via CDP, then query the snapshot) and the 'live DOM snapshot' concept. However, it does not mention potential side effects like storing the document (store_document defaults to true), resource limits, or network behavior, leaving gaps.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the tool's purpose. Every word earns its place; 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 an output schema, the tool has 14 parameters, no annotations, and a very terse description. It omits details about the fetch process, storage side effects, pagination, and parameter semantics. For such a complex tool, the description is too minimal to fully guide an agent.

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 only indirectly clarifies the 'query' and 'mode' parameters by mentioning 'CSS or XPath query'. It provides no guidance for the other 12 parameters, including required 'url' and important ones like 'limit', 'headers', or 'store_document'. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch', 'run') and clearly identifies the resource ('a rendered page through CDP', 'live DOM snapshot'). It distinguishes the tool from siblings by highlighting the rendered/CDP aspect, which differentiates it from static query_selector and pure fetch tools like silkworm_fetch_cdp.

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 implies the intended usage: use this tool when a page needs to be rendered (via CDP) before querying the live DOM. This provides clear context for when to choose it over alternatives, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools or provide exclusions.

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