Extract Form

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, but it only repeats the purpose. It does not mention whether selector limits to a single form, how hidden/readonly fields are treated, whether page must be loaded, or what happens when no form is found.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, but it is under-specified relative to the tool's complexity. It earns its place for stating purpose, but fails to convey necessary nuance.

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?

The description is minimal for a tool with two parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. It does not explain selector behavior, return format, error conditions, or practical use cases, leaving significant gaps for an agent to safely invoke it.

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 adds no meaning to the parameters. The optional 'selector' parameter is not explained, leaving its role and expected format entirely unspecified even though the tool's behavior likely depends on it.

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 extracts form field schema from the page, using a specific verb ('Extract') and resource ('form field schema'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like extract_text, extract_table, and get_interactive_elements.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or preconditions. The description does not explain what to do with the extracted schema or how it relates to fill/select_option tools.

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