playwright_cli_snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'capture,' which implies a read operation, but does not disclose whether a page must be open, whether it has side effects, what the element refs are for, or any limits like max_chars or timeout. This lack of detail leaves significant uncertainty.

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 of 11 words that front-loads the core action. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

While the output schema exists (so return values are covered), the description is too sparse for a tool with six configurable parameters. It lacks behavioral context and parameter semantics, making it incomplete for an agent to correctly invoke the tool with appropriate settings. The core purpose is clear, but operational details are 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention any of the six parameters (ref, boxes, depth, session, max_chars, timeout_seconds). The parameter names are partially self-explanatory, but without descriptions, the agent cannot understand nuances like what 'ref' refers to or how 'depth' affects output. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of documentation.

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 uses a specific verb ('capture') and identifies a clear resource ('accessibility snapshot and element refs') scoped to 'the current page.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like open, goto, action, save, and close, which have different purposes.

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 phrase 'from the current page' implies the tool is used after navigating to a page, providing implied usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites, so it falls short of clear guidance.

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