element_find

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that it returns element_id for future reference, explains locator syntax, and describes the two-step find behavior for parent. However, it does not explicitly state that it is a read-only operation, nor does it describe timeout behavior, failure handling, or side effects. The provided context is useful but incomplete.

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 four sentences plus a concise list of locator syntax options. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. The syntax list could be more structured, but overall it is efficient and clear.

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 the complexity (5 parameters, 1 required, no schema descriptions, no annotations, output schema exists but not described), the description is incomplete. It does not explain all parameters, does not describe the return info beyond element_id, and does not address error handling or waiting behavior. The gaps limit usability for an agent.

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. It explains the locator parameter in detail with syntax examples and explains the parent parameter as scoping. However, it does not explain the 'by', 'tab_id', or 'timeout' parameters. Only 2 of 5 parameters get meaningful description, leaving significant gaps.

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 it finds a single element and returns its info including element_id. It distinguishes from sibling tool element_find_all by explicitly saying 'single element', and explains the two-step find with parent. The verb 'Find' and resource 'single element' make the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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 implies usage context: use this to find an element for later interaction (by element_id). It explains locator syntax and the parent parameter for scoped finding. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance versus alternatives like element_find_all, though the distinction is natural.

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