wavexis_shadow_fill

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

Annotations show destructiveHint=true, consistent with filling an input. The description adds context by explaining it pierces shadow boundaries using a selector chain. It does not contradict annotations and provides operational details beyond what annotations convey. Could mention failure modes or side effects.

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: a one-line purpose, followed by a brief bullet-like Args and Returns. No wasted words, front-loaded with the key action. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool has one input object with three properties and an output schema. The description explains the input parameters partially and the return format. It covers the main use case but does not address error handling or edge cases. With annotations and output schema, it is mostly complete.

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 low (0% at top level). The description mentions 'selectors' and 'value' but omits 'session_id'. It adds some meaning beyond the schema for two parameters, but not for the third. Given low coverage, description partially compensates.

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 the action (fill an input element) and the context (inside shadow DOM tree), using specific verb 'Fill' and resource 'input element inside a shadow DOM tree'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'wavexis_fill' (regular input) and 'wavexis_shadow_click' (clicking).

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 mentions piercing shadow boundaries with selector chain, indicating when to use (for shadow DOM inputs). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives like 'wavexis_fill' for regular inputs. It provides clear context but lacks exclusions.

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