Extract page content

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

Beyond the readOnly/openWorld annotations, the description discloses that extraction does not navigate and that snapshot search preserves refs, ancestor paths, and nearby context. It does not cover error behavior or permission requirements, but it adds useful behavioral detail for a read-only extraction tool.

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 two tightly written sentences with no filler. It front-loads the action and scope, then adds the most relevant output behavior.

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 the fully described schema and read-only/openWorld annotations, the description is largely complete: it covers formats, non-navigation, and snapshot search context. It does not fully explain return shapes for every format, which is a minor gap because no output schema exists.

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 seven parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds some useful context about snapshot search output, but it does not add parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides for target, depth, boxes, session_id, and main_content_only.

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 states a specific verb and resource: read the current page or one element as snapshot, HTML, Markdown, or text. The phrase 'without navigating' directly distinguishes it from navigation/fetch siblings, so an agent can identify its role without opening the schema.

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?

It gives clear usage context by specifying reading the current page or a single element without navigating. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as browser_fetch or browser_evaluate, so it stops short of full when/when-not routing guidance.

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