select_option

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the failure mode (unknown option returns the list of valid options), but says nothing about whether change events fire, whether it waits for the UI to settle, or what include_snapshot does.

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?

Two compact sentences with the core action first and the failure behavior second. Nothing is wasted and it is easy to scan.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and the required parameters are covered. But with zero schema coverage and no annotations, the unexplained include_snapshot flag and the lack of any note on triggering events leave real gaps.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does explain 'option' as a value or visible label and ties 'index' to the <select> list, but the third parameter include_snapshot (default true) is never mentioned, leaving it opaque.

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: choose an option in a <select> list identified by an index. That is clearly distinguishable from generic click or type_text siblings, though it doesn't explicitly name an alternative for non-select elements.

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?

Usage is implied by the reference to a <select> element, so an agent can infer it applies to dropdowns rather than arbitrary clicks. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no mention of alternatives like click or press_key for non-select widgets.

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