wavexis_dom_focus

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond 'Focus'. It does not explain what focusing does (e.g., changes active element, scrolls into view) or side effects. Given annotations, the description should still add value but fails to do so.

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 very short, with two sentences plus Args/Returns boilerplate. While concise, it lacks important details, making it under-specified. It could be restructured to include parameter explanations without being verbose.

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 low complexity (only 2 parameters), the description should be more complete. It does not explain what the return value JSON contains beyond 'status ok', nor does it cover edge cases (e.g., element not found). Output schema exists but description fails to leverage it.

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%, so the description must compensate. However, it only mentions 'input: Focus parameters' and does not explain the 'selector' or 'session_id' fields. The method description implies selector is a CSS selector, but no details on session_id meaning or usage.

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 explicitly states the action ('Focus') and the target ('an element matching a CSS selector'), making the purpose clear and specific. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like wavexis_dom_query (which queries) and wavexis_click (which clicks).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to focus an element versus clicking or waiting. No when-not-to-use or prerequisite information is given.

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