browser_wait_for

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, indicating safe, non-mutating behavior. The description adds the three specific waiting modes (text presence, absence, timeout) which are not captured by annotations alone. No contradictions.

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?

A single sentence that conveys the core functionality. It is concise but could be slightly more structured (e.g., listing the three options explicitly). No wasted words.

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 3 optional parameters and no output schema. The description covers the three waiting modes adequately. However, it does not explain what happens when no parameters are provided (e.g., likely no wait), or what the return value indicates (e.g., did the condition succeed?). Slightly incomplete for a tool with no output schema.

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 100%, so each parameter already has a description. The description groups the three parameters into 'text to appear or disappear or a specified time to pass', linking them to the three modes. This adds value beyond the individual schema descriptions.

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 waits for text to appear, disappear, or a specified time to pass. The verb 'wait for' and the resource/conditions are explicit, distinguishing it from other browser tools like click or navigate.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., browser_snapshot for checking content, or explicit sleep). There are no when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions, leaving the agent to infer context.

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