get_computed_style

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

With readOnlyHint=true, the annotation covers the safety profile. The description adds the 'computed' qualifier, clarifying that it returns resolved styles rather than inline or default values, but does not disclose edge cases like missing elements or invalid property names.

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, front-loaded sentence with no fluff. Every word contributes to clarifying the tool's purpose.

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 read-only tool with two well-defined parameters and an output schema, the description is sufficient. It conveys the essential function, though it omits any mention of error behavior or handling of non-matching selectors, which would be useful but not critical.

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%, so the baseline applies. The description paraphrases the schema ('given properties' and 'element matched by selector') without adding additional semantic details such as return format or default behavior.

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 the tool retrieves computed CSS values for specified properties on a selector-matched element, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_html or get_title by focusing on computed styles.

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 evaluate_js or get_inspected_element. The description simply states the operation without context on selection criteria or exclusions.

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