snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full safety/disclosure burden. It adds useful behavioral context: the snapshot is an indexed list of interactive elements, indices are tied to the current page state, and stale results require a re-run. It doesn't explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, but the phrase 'Return' and the provided workflow imply no side effects.

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?

Three short segments with no filler: the main purpose, a usage tip, and a parameter note. The most important information appears first and the entire description is under 70 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 single-parameter, read-only tool with an output schema, the description covers the core contract: what is returned, how to interpret it, when to refresh, and how to address a session. Nothing essential is missing.

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 only defines `session_id` with a default and no descriptive help text (0% coverage). The description's Args section adds meaning by identifying it as 'Session to inspect', which clarifies the parameter's role beyond the schema's bare type and default.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource ('Return... interactive elements') and defines the output format `[index] <tag> text`, which distinguishes it from sibling read tools like get_content or 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?

It explicitly instructs to pass an index to click/type_text and to re-run after the page changes, giving clear context for when to use it and how the result should be consumed. It doesn't name exclusions or alternative tools, but the usage note makes the intended scenario clear.

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