browser_hide_highlight

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond stating the action. For a simple tool, this is acceptable but does not enrich the agent's understanding of side effects or prerequisites.

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 a single, short sentence containing exactly the necessary information. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff. It is efficiently front-loaded.

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?

For a simple tool with fully described parameters, the description is adequate but lacks explicit mention of prerequisites (e.g., that a highlight must have been previously added via browser_highlight) and does not specify the effect on the page or reversibility. Given the tool's simplicity, it is acceptable but not fully 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 100% and the schema itself provides detailed descriptions for both parameters ('target' and 'element'). The tool description adds no additional meaning or context about the parameters, so it meets the baseline with no extra value.

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 verb 'Remove' and the resource 'highlight overlay', and it is specific about the action being the inverse of adding a highlight. Among siblings, browser_highlight exists, so the distinction is clear without needing explicit mention.

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 implies the tool should be used to undo a previously added highlight, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like browser_annotate or browser_hover. No exclusions or context are provided, so usage guidance is only implied.

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