get_text

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It only states the basic return value (innerText) but does not disclose behavior for missing elements, error handling, or edge cases like null/empty results. Basic but insufficient for safe invocation.

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?

Single sentence, very concise and front-loaded. However, it is almost too minimal—could benefit from a bit more detail without losing clarity.

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?

An output schema exists, so return value explanation is not needed. However, with 0% schema coverage and no annotations, the description lacks completeness on parameter behavior, default actions, and error cases. For a tool with optional parameters, more context is expected.

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%, requiring the description to explain parameters. It mentions 'selector or ref' but gives no format, constraints, or usage hints. The mutual exclusivity of selector and ref is implied but not explicit.

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 tool returns innerText of an element (by selector or ref) or the whole document. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_html (HTML content) and get_attribute (specific attribute).

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 usage by mentioning 'by selector or ref', but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use selector vs ref, or when to prefer this tool over alternatives like evaluate or get_html. No when-not-to-use or fallback advice.

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