browser_get_text

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose important behavioral details such as whether it returns the first matching element, how it handles missing elements, or whether it waits for the element to appear. This leaves significant ambiguity for an AI agent invoking the 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 a single concise sentence with no filler. It is short and to the point, earning a high score for efficiency.

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?

Despite the simple nature of the tool, the description lacks critical context like whether it retrieves text from the first matching element, whether hidden text is included, and what happens if no match is found. Given the large set of similar browser tools, this ambiguity could lead to incorrect tool selection.

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 description covers 100% of the parameter, and the tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the selector field. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema adequately documents the parameter.

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 retrieves text content from an element, using a specific verb and resource. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like browser_get_inner_html and browser_get_outer_html, but does not explicitly mention when it should be preferred over them.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as browser_get_content, browser_get_inner_html, or browser_get_attribute. The description implies general use for extracting text but lacks any specifics about prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative conditions.

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