detect_captchas

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It does this well by disclosing that the tool opens a headless browser, inspects the DOM, requires playwright, and returns either a success payload with detected captchas or an error. This goes beyond the schema and gives the agent a solid picture of side effects and prerequisites.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core purpose. Each sentence serves a purpose: what it does, how it behaves, the environment requirement, the parameter, and the return contract. Nothing is redundant.

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?

For a one-parameter detection tool, the description is complete: it states the action, mechanics, prerequisite, parameter, and return shape. The only minor gap is that the listed captcha types are examples rather than an exhaustive set, and there is no mention of potential load-time or network behavior. An output schema exists, so return values need not be fully re-explained.

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%, so the description must compensate for the bare 'page_url' string parameter. It does by defining page_url as 'The full URL of the page to inspect,' adding meaningful guidance about what value the tool expects. It could add URL format specifics, but the provided semantics are sufficient for a single 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 opens with a specific verb plus resource: 'Detect which captcha types are present on a given page URL.' It clearly distinguishes this detection tool from the sibling solvers like solve_captcha and solve_on_page, so an agent knows exactly what operation this tool performs.

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 explains how the tool works ('Opens the page in a headless browser and inspects the DOM') and notes the requirement that playwright be installed, which is useful context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of solve_captcha or solve_on_page; the intended use is only implied by the word 'detect.'

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