browser_get_content

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions HTML/text format and element selection but does not disclose behavior for missing elements, error conditions, or performance implications. Basic transparency, but significant gaps remain.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with action and resource. Every word carries meaning. No wasted content.

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 no output schema, description could mention return value format (string). It covers basic functionality but omits return type and behavior for invalid selectors. Minor gaps for a simple 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% (all parameters documented in schema). Description adds context by specifying 'page or specific element' and implying default values (body selector, text format). Adds meaning beyond schema, e.g., that selector is optional and defaults to body.

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?

Description clearly states the action 'Get' and the resource 'content of a page or specific element'. It distinguishes from siblings like browser_screenshot (visual capture) and browser_evaluate (JavaScript evaluation).

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Usage is implied but no alternatives or exclusions mentioned. The description is minimal and does not help differentiate from related tools like browser_evaluate or browser_get_console.

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