get_page_dom

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: it requires an API key, truncates to max_chars, and notes that full DOMs regularly exceed 1 MB. This gives the agent important operational context beyond the schema, though it does not cover edge cases like missing DOM snapshots.

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 brief, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence adds value (use cases, API key, truncation/scale). No unnecessary filler or repetition of schema details.

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 moderate complexity and presence of an output schema, the description provides sufficient context: what it does, when to use it, and critical behavioral caveats. It misses a direct note about the uuid semantics, but overall it is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 description mentions max_chars and explains truncation, but does not clarify the meaning of the required 'uuid' parameter, which is essential for invocation. Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description must compensate more, and it only partially does so for max_chars, not uuid.

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 'Fetch the captured DOM snapshot for a scan,' identifying the specific resource and action. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_scan_result and get_screenshot_url by focusing on the DOM snapshot, making its purpose 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 provides clear usage context with 'Useful for inspecting injected scripts, hidden form fields, or obfuscated payloads,' but does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or name alternatives. This is clear context without exclusions, fitting a score of 4.

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