find_challenge

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

Consistent with readOnlyHint annotation; describes output fields (present, kind, widgetState, etc.) which adds value beyond the annotation. No hidden side effects mentioned, but for a read-only detection tool this is acceptable.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the verb 'Detect' and resource. Every word adds value; no redundancy.

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?

Lists return fields comprehensively, compensating for lack of output schema. However, for a tool in a set with 'solve_challenge', missing context on how it fits the workflow reduces completeness.

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?

No parameters exist, so the description cannot add value beyond the schema. Baseline 4 is appropriate as the tool is parameterless.

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 detects common browser interstitials and challenge controls, listing return fields. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'solve_challenge' tool, which is the next logical step.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like wait_for or snapshot. The context implies use before solving challenges, but this is not stated.

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