ui_find_element

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

While no annotations are provided, the description mentions returning elements with tap coordinates but lacks details on multiple matches, timeouts, or confirmation of whether it waits for elements. Schema descriptions partially compensate by noting match types.

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 concise sentences directly stating purpose and a key usage rule. No redundant information, front-loaded with the main action.

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 covers basic functionality and return value, but lacks details on multiple matches or ordering. Given no output schema, it could be more complete but is sufficient for common 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the description adds no new meaning beyond listing the criteria types (text, resource ID, class name, content description). It does not explain behavior like partial vs exact matching beyond what schema descriptions already provide.

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 tool finds UI elements by various criteria (text, resource ID, class name, content description) and returns coordinates, distinguishing it from sibling tools like tap or ui_dump.

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?

It specifies that at least one search criterion must be provided, giving clear usage constraints. It does not explicitly compare to alternatives, but the context of sibling tools makes usage context clear.

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