get_aria_snapshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic function and format, omitting details about permissions, side effects, performance, or what the YAML output contains. This is insufficient for an LLM to understand the tool's behavior.

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, which is concise and front-loaded with the core function. However, it could benefit from structure (e.g., separate usage note) and still be concise. It is not verbose or wasteful.

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 tool returns structured data (YAML) and has one parameter, the description is incomplete. It does not describe the output schema, what the ARIA tree contains, or how the selector affects the result. The agent may misinterpret the output or usage boundaries.

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%, and the description does not mention the single parameter 'selector' at all. It fails to explain what the selector does (e.g., CSS selector or XPath), its default behavior, or acceptable values. The agent is left with no guidance beyond the parameter name.

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's function: retrieving the ARIA accessibility tree as YAML. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_html' or 'get_page_content' by specifying 'ARIA accessibility tree' and the format 'YAML'.

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 phrase 'ideal for LLM navigation' hints at a specific use case, but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or alternatives. It lacks exclusions or context to help an agent decide between this and similar tools like 'get_html' or 'describe_element'.

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