Browser Captcha Detect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. The term 'Detect' conveys a read-only inspection and the listed outputs are helpful, but the description does not state whether the tool waits for page load, probes network activity, or is strictly passive.

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 compact sentence, front-loaded with the verb and object, and the parenthetical packs output detail without unnecessary words. There is no filler or redundancy.

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 two-parameter read-only detector with an output schema, the description is mostly sufficient at a high level. However, the missing parameter explanations and absent usage guidance leave gaps that an agent must infer from sibling tools or naming conventions.

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% and the description does not mention the 'tab' or 'session' parameters at all, adding no meaning beyond the schema's names and defaults. The generic browser-context parameters are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 uses a specific verb ('Detect') with a clear resource ('captcha widgets on the current page') and enumerates the output facets (type, evidence, sitekeys). This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tools browser_captcha_solve and browser_captcha_manual_wait.

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 is for inspecting captchas before solving or waiting, but it never explicitly states when to use it versus browser_captcha_solve or browser_captcha_manual_wait, nor does it give exclusions. The 'on the current page' scope provides context, but there is no direct alternative-routing guidance.

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