browser_get_links

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Extract all links' states the core read-only behavior, but it does not detail what constitutes a link (e.g., anchor tags only, href attribute), what format the output takes, or any limitations. The behavior is basic but not fully transparent.

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 is front-loaded and contains no filler. Every word adds value, making it an excellent model of brevity.

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 is simple, but the absence of an output schema means the description should ideally clarify what 'links' returns (e.g., an array of URL strings, objects with href and text). This gap makes the description adequate but not fully complete for an agent needing return value details.

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 schema description coverage is 100% for the single optional 'filter' parameter, which is described as 'Filter by URL or text'. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 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?

The description 'Extract all links from the page' uses a specific verb ('Extract') and resource ('all links from the page'), clearly distinguishing this tool from siblings like browser_get_elements or browser_extract_images. The purpose is immediately understandable and unambiguous.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or suggest other tools for different scenarios, leaving the agent without explicit usage context.

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