playwright__browser_handle_dialog

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

Annotations indicate this is destructive, but the description adds no context beyond that. It fails to mention that accepting or dismissing a dialog consumes it, that promptText is only relevant for prompt dialogs, or that side effects depend on the dialog type.

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 short but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It provides no structural information and merely repeats the tool's name and title.

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 tool that handles browser dialogs, the description omits crucial behavioral context: when the tool should be called, what happens to the dialog, and how accept/promptText interact. The absence of an output schema makes this gap more significant.

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 100%, with both 'accept' and 'promptText' already clearly documented. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Handle a dialog' is essentially a restatement of the tool name and title. It does not specify what handling entails, such as accepting, dismissing, or providing text for a prompt dialog.

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, such as when a dialog is open and awaiting interaction. It also does not mention prerequisites or contrast with any alternative approach.

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