browser_snapshot

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

Discloses caching behavior ('Cached until the page changes') which is useful. However, it does not mention that the tool is read-only, nor does it describe the format of the snapshot or any potential cost (e.g., memory or time). Since no annotations are provided, the description carries burden but is somewhat vague.

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?

Two sentences that front-load the purpose and then add key behavioral detail. 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?

For a tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main point (snapshot with stable IDs) and adds caching info. It could be more specific about what 'structured' means, but it's sufficient for simple use.

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?

No parameters exist, and schema coverage is 100%. Description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly states it gets a structured snapshot of the current page and that each interactive element has a stable ID. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like browser_read_text or browser_find.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It implies using it before interactions to get stable IDs, but does not mention alternatives or conditions where another tool might be better.

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