get

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits, but it only states the action without explaining side effects, error states, or expectations (e.g., what happens if the element is not found). This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 that efficiently states the core functionality. It is well-front-loaded and avoids unnecessary verbosity, though it could benefit from a bit more structure given the tool's complexity.

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 high schema coverage, the description fails to provide context about the 'element' domain, expected return format, or how this tool fits into the workflow with 27 parameters and many sibling tools. The completeness is inadequate.

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 coverage is 96%, so the input schema already documents most parameters thoroughly. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, earning the baseline score of 3.

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 'Get element text or attributes' clearly states the verb (Get) and the resource (element text or attributes), making the basic purpose understandable. However, it does not distinguish this tool from many siblings like 'find' or 'snapshot', which also deal with UI elements.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'snapshot' or 'find'. The description lacks any context about the appropriate scenarios or prerequisites, leaving the agent with no decision support.

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