pilot_page_attrs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It discloses the return type (JSON object) and error handling but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only and non-destructive, which is important for a read 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 concise and well-structured: purpose, usage, parameters, returns, errors. Every sentence adds value, and key information is front-loaded.

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?

The tool has one required parameter and no output schema; the description explains the return format and error conditions adequately. It could mention that the element must exist in the DOM, but overall it is complete for its complexity.

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% for the single parameter 'ref'. The description expands on the schema by giving examples ('@e3' and CSS selector), adding clarity beyond the schema's minimal description.

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 explicitly states 'Get all HTML attributes of a specific element as a JSON object,' providing a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools that retrieve other page properties (CSS, HTML, text, links, forms).

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 advises when to use the tool (inspect attributes, check custom data, debug) and includes error conditions (stale ref). It does not explicitly exclude scenarios, but the sibling list implies context.

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