browser_snapshot

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, which covers the safety profile. The description adds minimal behavioral context: it identifies the snapshot as an accessibility snapshot and notes superiority to screenshots, but doesn't describe the output format, size, or side effects. No contradiction with 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, concise sentence that immediately states the action and includes a useful comparative note. Every word contributes to the core message without redundancy or filler.

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 captures the core purpose and distinguishes it from screenshots, but it does not explain what an accessibility snapshot contains or the return format. With no output schema, some uncertainty exists, yet the thorough parameter schemas and safety annotations make the tool's context reasonably complete.

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 covers all four parameters with detailed descriptions (100% coverage), including coordinate semantics and file-saving behavior. The tool description itself does not add parameter information, which is acceptable given the schema's completeness.

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 'Capture accessibility snapshot of the current page', specifying the verb, resource, and scope. The phrase 'better than screenshot' distinguishes it from browser_take_screenshot, even though it doesn't address other siblings like browser_get_html.

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 a comparative recommendation ('this is better than screenshot') that suggests preferring this tool over screenshots for accessibility needs. However, it does not explicitly state exclusions or mention alternatives beyond screenshots, leaving some indirectness in the guidance.

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