discover_selectors

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 discloses the inspect-and-detect nature and the per-page workflow, but does not mention side effects such as whether selectors are persisted or overwritten, or whether any state changes occur.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a concise workflow. Every word earns its place and there is no wasted text.

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 description covers the purpose, the exact pages to use, and the follow-up tool. It does not explicitly describe return format or error conditions, but for a one-parameter tool with a clear workflow, this is reasonably complete.

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?

The schema provides 100% parameter coverage with a descriptive enum and an explanation for 'current'. The description adds little beyond reinforcing the page list, so the baseline of 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 uses a specific verb ('Inspect') and clearly defines the resource ('current page DOM') and outcome ('auto-detect CSS selectors for UpGrad LXP elements'). It directly distinguishes the tool from siblings like apply_selectors and get_selectors.

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 explicitly instructs when to use the tool ('Run this on each key page') and directs the user to follow up with apply_selectors, providing a clear workflow. It lacks when-not or alternative exclusions, but the context is strong.

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