wait_for_hidden

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It fails to explain polling behavior, timeout handling, error conditions (e.g., what happens if element never disappears), or whether it checks visibility vs. existence. The meaning of 'disappear' is ambiguous.

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 extremely concise (5 words) but at the cost of completeness. While front-loaded, it does not earn its place as it omits critical information like parameter usage, behavior, and return value.

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 (browser automation, 2 parameters, no annotations, output schema exists), the description is grossly incomplete. It lacks parameter explanations, usage context, behavioral details, and return value description, 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%, and the description adds no parameter details. It does not explain that 'selector' is a CSS selector or that 'timeout' is in milliseconds. The agent must infer meaning from parameter names alone, which is insufficient.

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 'Wait for an element to disappear' clearly indicates the tool waits for an element to become hidden or vanish. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'wait_for' (which typically waits for visibility) and 'wait_for_url' (which waits for URL). The verb+resource is specific and actionable.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not state when to use this tool instead of alternatives (e.g., 'wait_for'), nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. The agent receives no context about typical scenarios or limitations.

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