find

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, so leading with 'Read-only' earns no credit, but the description adds real substance: only visible elements are searched, matching is case-insensitive substring, results carry a ref usable by click/type/hover/fill_form, and an empty return means no match. It does not mention caveats such as iframe/shadow-DOM scoping or whether matches are capped beyond the limit parameter.

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?

Three tight sentences: capability first, then when-to-use, then failure behavior. Every sentence carries distinct information with zero restatement of the schema.

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?

For a 3-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned (role, name, ref), how refs are consumed, and the empty-result case. Only edge-case scoping (frames, hidden elements, ordering of matches) is unaddressed, which is a minor gap.

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 query, tab and limit are already documented in the schema with the same semantics (case-insensitive substring over text/label/placeholder/id/name). The description restates the query behavior but adds nothing new, and says nothing about tab or limit beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (search the page for visible elements) plus exactly what is matched (text, accessible label, placeholder, id or name), and returns role/name/ref. It is clearly differentiated from snapshot and get_text by the 'without a full snapshot' framing.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it (locate one element on a large page without a full snapshot), names the alternative (snapshot), and gives a recovery path when no match is found (shorten the query or call snapshot). Nothing is left to inference.

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