Get iframe context from spec

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states what the tool returns ('iframe locator string, count of frame operations, and enforcement reminder') and emphasizes the deterministic nature of the result. It does not mention error handling or side effects, but for a read-only extraction tool, the disclosed behavior is sufficient.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence adds essential information. There is no filler or repetition of schema details, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 a single parameter and no output schema, the description is complete: it explains what the tool does, what it returns, and exactly when to invoke it. It also integrates well with sibling tools by directing the calling sequence, leaving no critical gaps for an agent to guess.

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 schema describes specFilePath as 'Absolute path to the spec file' (100% coverage). The description adds meaning by noting the tool also reads 'its page object' and returns specific frame-related context, which goes beyond the raw parameter definition and helps the agent understand the tool's broader operation.

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 ('Extract') and resource ('iframe selector and frame-related operations'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like analyze_and_fix_selector or read_spec_file. It also states the source (spec file and page object), making the tool's function unambiguous.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Call this for any failure whose context is ''iframe''' and positions it as a prerequisite before analyze_and_fix_selector. It also provides a strong exclusion rule: 'the model must never guess the iframe selector,' making the usage guidance direct and actionable.

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