wavexis_find

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds context by stating 'fetches and searches the a11y tree read-only' and specifies the return format (JSON with status, matches, count). This adds value beyond annotations without contradiction.

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 three sentences long, with the first sentence stating the purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, usage alternative, side effects and return format. No unnecessary words.

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?

The output schema exists, so return format is not required in description, but it's provided anyway. However, parameter descriptions are lacking, and the tool's context (e.g., what an accessibility snapshot is) is assumed. Given the complexity (search tool with limited parameters), completeness is adequate but not excellent.

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 explain parameters. Only the 'text' parameter is hinted at ('text or regex pattern'). The 'limit' and 'session_id' parameters are not described, leaving the agent to infer their purpose. This is insufficient.

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 'Search the accessibility snapshot for nodes matching text or a regex pattern', specifying a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool wavexis_act by noting that wavexis_act is for natural-language interaction, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'Use `wavexis_act` instead for natural-language element interaction; this tool mirrors Playwright's snapshot search for compatibility.' This tells when to use this tool versus alternatives. Additionally, it mentions 'Side effects: None', reinforcing safe usage.

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