pilot_element_state

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that it returns a boolean string, lists possible errors, and implies non-destructive read operation. Could mention absence of side effects.

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?

Description is concise and well-structured: purpose, usage, parameters, return, errors. Each sentence adds value with no 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?

Given 2 required parameters and no output schema, description fully covers return type, error handling, and parameter usage. No gaps for a simple query tool.

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 coverage is 100% (baseline 3). Description adds meaning by explaining ref sources (snapshot or CSS selector) and giving usage examples for property, exceeding schema details.

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 checks element state (visible, hidden, etc.) and lists all possible states. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like pilot_assert by focusing on querying state rather than asserting conditions.

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 provides explicit when-to-use scenarios (e.g., verify condition before interaction, debug failure) but does not explicitly state when not to use or suggest alternatives.

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