browser_diff

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

With no annotations present, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only states the core action without disclosing whether it is read-only, what it returns, any side effects, or auth requirements. This is insufficient for a tool with six parameters.

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 extremely concise (six words), which earns points for brevity, but it is under-specified for a complex tool with six parameters. It lacks structure, front-loading, or any elaboration that would aid an agent.

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 six parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far from complete. It does not explain the diff workflow, the meaning of 'type' (e.g., visual vs. DOM), how baseline and target are used, or what the output JSON contains. An agent would struggle to call this correctly.

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 100%, so all parameters have descriptions. The tool description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema—it implies baseline and target are compared, but does not explain their roles or how parameters relate. Baseline 3 applies since the schema carries the semantics.

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 'Diff snapshots/screenshots' clearly states a specific operation (diff) on a resource (snapshots/screenshots). It is not a tautology and distinguishes from siblings like browser_snapshot or browser_screenshot, though it lacks detail on what 'diff' entails.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like browser_snapshot or browser_screenshot. The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or any contextual cues for selection.

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