browser_interact

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions actions but does not indicate that clicking/typing are mutational, whether modifications are reversible, or the need for page focus. Output schema exists but return values are not described.

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, but it is under-specified rather than concise; it lacks critical details about parameter usage and behavior, making it inefficient for an agent to use correctly.

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 three parameters, no annotation support, and no parameter descriptions, the description fails to provide essential context. It does not cover how to specify actions, query selectors, or input values, leaving the agent to guess.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It lists 'click, type, extract' but does not map them to the 'action' parameter, nor explain the meaning of 'selector' and 'value' in relation to these actions. Parameter semantics are entirely absent.

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 specifies the verb 'Interact' and lists example actions (click, type, extract), making it clear that this tool manipulates the active browser page. It distinguishes from sibling tools like scrape_browser which are read-only scraping.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or limitations (e.g., when to prefer a specific sibling tool). The description is purely functional.

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