browser_select

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and falls short: it does not state whether selection replaces or appends to existing options (relevant since 'values' is an array, implying multi-select), whether change events fire, or what happens if a value is not found. Only the existence of the action is conveyed.

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?

A single compact sentence with no filler, and the key disambiguator (value vs. visible text) is placed inline. Brevity is close to under-specification but no sentence is wasted.

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 3-parameter mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and only 33% schema coverage, the description should explain 'ref', multi-value/multi-select behavior, and the snapshot flag's purpose. None of these appear, so an agent would have to guess at important call semantics.

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 only 33% (only 'snapshot' is documented in the schema), and the description partially compensates by explaining that 'values' can be matched by value or visible text. However, the 'ref' parameter and array/multi-select semantics are left completely unexplained in both places.

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?

Names a specific action (select options) on a specific resource (<select> element), and adds how options are identified (by value or visible text). This is clearly distinguishable from siblings like browser_click or browser_type at a glance, though it does not explicitly say it is the preferred tool over click for native dropdowns.

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 on when to use this versus browser_click/browser_type on a dropdown, nor on what to do with custom (non-<select>) dropdown widgets. The agent must infer the selection context entirely from the tool name.

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