safari_verify_state

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains the behavioral trait: modern editors maintain state separately from DOM, making .value or .textContent unreliable. It describes what the tool does (verify state) and what it returns. This provides clear expectations for the agent.

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 sentences with no redundant information. First sentence states action and output; second sentence explains rationale and usage. Well front-loaded and efficient.

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 the tool's complexity (state verification for modern editors) and lack of output schema, the description is thorough. It explains the problem, when to use, and what the return values are. No obvious gaps for an agent to understand its role.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. The overall description adds context about the purpose but does not provide additional parameter-level detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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's purpose: verify framework-level state of an editor/input. It specifies the return format (JSON with match, mode, actual, expected, hint) and distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explaining the sequence (after safari_fill, before submit).

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?

Explicit usage guidance: 'Call this AFTER safari_fill and BEFORE clicking Submit on critical forms'. It lists example sites (Featured.com, etc.) and explains why it's needed (modern editors have separate state). It doesn't explicitly say when not to use, but the context implies it's for forms with framework-managed editors.

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