chrome_snapshot

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose side effects, permissions, and return behavior. It does list the content captured, but omits whether the page is modified, whether it requires a loaded page, or the output format. It also does not mention the debugUrl or other operational details.

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, succinct sentence that front-loads the core action ('Summarize') and lists specific content types without fluff. It is highly concise.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description lacks detail on how to use it correctly in an automation workflow. The phrase 'selected page' is vague, and there is no mention of return structure, limits, or preconditions. The description does not cover enough for a complete understanding.

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 coverage is 0%: none of the 6 parameters are described. The description does not explain tabId, debugUrl, maxElements, etc., leaving the user without guidance on how to configure the tool. This is a significant gap.

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 clearly states the tool's function: it summarizes the selected page's visible elements (text, links, buttons, inputs, selects, forms) specifically for automation planning. This differentiates it from sibling tools like chrome_screenshot or chrome_eval.

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 usage during the planning phase for automation ('for automation planning'), but does not explicitly specify when to use it versus alternative tools like chrome_navigate or chrome_click, nor does it provide exclusions.

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