browser_overview

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description fully covers behavioral traits including that selectors are CDP-generated snapshots, input text reflects hint text not typed values, and state information for ARIA controls. It also mentions the need to re-call after page changes.

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 well-structured: first sentence states main purpose, second gives usage context, third describes scope, and final caveats. It is concise and front-loaded, with no unnecessary 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 description explains the return content (CSS selectors, text, viewport status, ARIA states) and caveats about input text. It covers essential behavioral details despite the lack of an output schema. However, it could explicitly state that the output is a list of elements.

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% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description adds minimal new parameter semantics beyond what is already in the schema (e.g., 'scope limits to a CSS subsection'). Baseline is 3 as per guidelines.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'all interactive elements', and specifies it returns CSS selectors, text, and viewport status. It differentiates from sibling tools like browser_click and screenshot by explicitly stating 'use before browser_click' and 'prefer this over screenshot'.

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?

Provides explicit usage guidance: 'use before browser_click to discover stable selectors' and 'prefer this over screenshot when verifying button/toggle state'. It also mentions scope limitation and a caveat about re-calling after navigation. However, it does not explicitly list alternatives or cases where the tool should not be used.

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