browser_query_selector_all

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'query multiple elements' without revealing return format (e.g., array of element handles, text content), behavior on no matches (empty list vs error), or any side effects (likely none, but not explicitly stated). This lack of detail limits transparency.

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 redundant filler. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easily scannable. However, it is a bit too terse for a tool without annotations, so it misses a little on completeness while maintaining conciseness.

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 simplicity (one parameter, no annotations, no output schema), the description covers the basic purpose but omits crucial context about the return value. The agent cannot know what 'query' returns (element references, text, etc.) or how to use the result, which is a significant gap for a tool without an output schema.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage with a description for the selector parameter ('CSS selector'). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it simply repeats 'by CSS selector'. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'query' with a specific resource 'multiple elements' and method 'by CSS selector', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like browser_query_selector (single element). The name reinforces this purpose, making it unambiguous.

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 implies usage when multiple elements are needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or alternatives. There is no guidance on when to prefer this over browser_query_selector, though the 'multiple' wording hints at it.

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