wavexis_dom_query

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint as false. The description adds the return format (JSON with elements, count, total) and mentions pagination, but does not disclose other behaviors such as error handling or performance implications. With annotations covering safety, the description adds moderate value.

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 concise (3 lines) and front-loads the purpose. However, it could be slightly more structured, e.g., listing key parameters. It earns its place without waste.

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's complexity (9 parameters, nested input) and the richness of annotations and sibling tools, the description provides only the basic purpose and return format. It does not cover all parameters or nuances like backends or session handling. The output schema is not provided but the description explains the return structure. Completeness is adequate but not thorough.

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 input schema has descriptions for some parameters (all, limit, offset), but not for others (selector, url, backend, etc.). The description only summarizes 'Query parameters (selector, all, pagination)', which groups but does not elaborate on the schema's existing coverage. The baseline of 3 is appropriate given partial schema coverage.

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 'Query elements by CSS selector', which is a specific verb-resource pair. It also mentions pagination in the returns, but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like wavexis_dom_get, which might retrieve a single element. The purpose is clear but could be more precise.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, conditions, or when not to use it. The agent would need to infer usage from the name and parameters.

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