browser_get_value

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

The word 'Get' implies a read-only action and 'current value/text' tells the agent what to expect. However, with no annotations provided, the description does not explicitly address side effects, waiting behavior, handling of invalid refs, or hidden elements. It is minimally transparent but leaves some behavioral context unspecified.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant wording. It conveys the operation and the key parameter in one line, earning its place.

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 one-parameter read tool, the description conveys the core action and the required input. However, it omits the source of refs, return behavior, and how this tool relates to the close sibling browser_read_text, so an agent may still have open questions.

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?

The schema only defines ref as a string with no description. The description adds that ref identifies a field or element, which provides some meaning, but it does not explain where ref comes from, its expected format, or how it relates to refs from other browser tools. Partial compensation for low schema coverage.

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 action (get current value/text) and a resource (field/element by ref). However, it does not differentiate this tool from the similarly named sibling browser_read_text, which could plausibly serve the same purpose.

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 about when to use browser_get_value instead of alternatives such as browser_read_text or browser_snapshot. There are no exclusions or conditions that would help an agent choose this tool.

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