browser_select_option

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true (modifies UI state) and openWorldHint=true (potential side effects). The description does not add any behavioral context beyond this, such as whether it triggers events or requires permissions. It meets the baseline but adds no extra 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 sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core action.

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 simple tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is sufficient. It could mention multi-select capability (implied by 'values' array) but that is already in the schema. It lacks context like dropdowns with search or custom options, but given the sibling set, this is adequate.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description adds no parameter details beyond what the schema provides (e.g., element for permission, target as selector, values as array). The description does not compensate for missing schema descriptions, but they are already present.

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 'Select an option in a dropdown', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like browser_click and browser_fill_form, as it is focused exclusively on dropdown selections.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., browser_click for regular clicks) or prerequisites (e.g., the dropdown must be visible). Usage context is only implied by the tool name.

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