browser_select_option

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds no additional behavioral context such as side effects (e.g., triggering change events), permission requirements, or what happens with multiple values. The description does not contradict the annotations, but it fails to disclose anything beyond them.

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, focused sentence with no unnecessary words. It is perfectly front-loaded and earns its place.

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 destructive browser interaction with no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not mention error scenarios, handling of multiple values, or the need for the target to be a select element. The schema and annotations are helpful, but the description leaves significant gaps for a tool that modifies page state.

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 input schema has comprehensive descriptions for all three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond clarifying the tool targets a dropdown, but this is marginal since the schema already covers the target and values.

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 'Select an option in a dropdown' clearly specifies the verb (select) and resource (option in a dropdown), distinguishing it from sibling interactions like browser_click or browser_type. It is specific 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?

Usage context is implied by the tool name and description ('select' implies dropdowns), but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this vs. alternatives like clicking the dropdown, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. This mirrors the 'implied usage' level.

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