browser.get_page_errors

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'read recent uncaught page errors' without explaining what 'recent' means, whether errors are cleared on read, if there is pagination, or what happens when no errors exist. This is insufficient for an agent to understand tool behavior.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. No extraneous information, every word 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?

Given the tool is a read operation with two parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is too minimal. It lacks details on return format, error handling, and what constitutes 'recent'. For completeness, it should provide more context about behavior and results.

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 description coverage is 0%, meaning the schema provides no parameter descriptions. The tool description adds no information about parameters; it does not explain the purpose of session_id (though implied) or the limit parameter beyond what is in the schema (default 20, max 100). The agent must infer meaning from names alone.

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 specifies the verb 'Read' and the resource 'recent uncaught page errors for an active session.' It differentiates from sibling tools like browser.get_console and browser.get_network_log by focusing specifically on uncaught errors. The scope ('recent', 'active session') adds precision.

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 implies usage for reading uncaught errors but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_console for console messages, get_request_failures for request errors). No when-not or comparative guidance is provided.

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