select

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

The annotation declares destructiveHint=true, and the description says 'select a value' without elaborating on side effects such as triggering change events, altering element state, or whether the change is permanent. Since annotations exist, the bar is lower, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotation's destructive hint.

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 concise sentence, front-loading the action. It's not verbose, but the brevity comes at the cost of missing important context. It earns a 4 because it's efficient and to the point, though not optimal.

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 tool with two required parameters, no parameter descriptions, no output schema, and no usage guidance, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what types of elements support selection, what the value should be, or any side effects, leaving an agent with insufficient information to invoke it confidently.

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 compensate. It only implies that uid identifies the element, but the 'value' parameter is entirely unexplained—what format, allowed values, or semantics. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the parameter names themselves.

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 a specific verb (select) and resource (element identified by uid), which distinguishes it from siblings like click or type. However, it doesn't specify the type of element (e.g., dropdown, list) or the nature of the value, so it's clear but not maximally specific.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among many browser automation siblings, there is no mention of scenarios where 'select' is appropriate or when other tools like 'click' or 'type' should be used instead. The context is entirely absent.

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