browser_act

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it reveals almost nothing. It does not state whether the tool mutates page state, what side effects occur, what limitations apply, or how the step is decided and executed. This is critically insufficient for a tool that likely performs arbitrary browser actions.

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 short and front-loaded, but it is under-specified rather than concisely informative. One vague sentence does not earn its place because it lacks the detail necessary for correct use of the tool.

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 absence of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, plus a large set of siblings, the overall context is severely incomplete. The description provides no information about return behavior, side effects, parameter semantics, or when this tool should be selected, making it impossible to invoke correctly with confidence.

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 description coverage is 0%, yet the description does not compensate by explaining either parameter. 'instruction' is echoed from the schema without additional meaning, and 'values' is entirely unexplained. An agent cannot reliably know what to provide for 'values' or what formats the instruction may take.

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 'Take one decided step towards an instruction on the current page' is vague and does not identify a concrete action or resource. It restates the generic act concept without specifying what kind of step (navigation, input, selection, etc.) is taken, and it does not distinguish this tool from the many sibling browser tools.

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 guidance is provided about when to use browser_act versus alternatives like browser_click, browser_type, or browser_run. The phrase 'towards an instruction' implies high-level task execution, but there is no explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusion criteria.

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