browser_dispatch_event

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

Annotations already flag the operation as not read-only and destructive (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true). The description adds only that it dispatches a 'custom event' with optional initialization, but does not warn about potential side effects or that dispatching arbitrary events may not trigger framework-specific handlers. It does not contradict the annotations.

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 sentence, immediately verb-first, with no filler. Every word contributes to the core meaning.

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 tool has no output schema and minimal annotations; the description leaves out crucial context such as what happens when the event is dispatched, whether the return value indicates success, and when to use this instead of browser_click or browser_type. The openWorldHint and destructiveHint suggest potential side effects, but the description does not elaborate, leaving gaps for an agent deciding if this is appropriate.

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 input schema already describes all three parameters with 100% coverage. The description's phrase 'custom initialization parameters' adds negligible meaning over the schema's 'Optional event initialization options,' and 'target element' mirrors the schema's 'target' description.

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 the specific verb 'dispatches' and identifies the resource as a 'custom event' on a 'target element,' making its function clear. It distinguishes from sibling interaction tools like browser_click or browser_type by focusing on arbitrary custom events.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus using higher-level interaction tools like browser_click or browser_type. There is no mention of use cases, exclusions, or when to prefer alternatives.

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