browser_snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden well: it discloses the exact output shape (ref, role, name, state, center @x,y in pixels), token cost (~15 tokens/element), default viewport scoping and what diff:true returns. It omits read-only status, ref stability across snapshots and behavior when the element limit is exceeded.

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?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with the primary-role signal and the no-screenshot constraint, then output shape, then cost and diff behavior. Zero filler.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description describes the returned fields, cost per element and diff mode, which is enough to call it correctly. Minor gaps: no note on error/empty-page behavior or how refs map to the action tools that consume them.

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 100%, so all four parameters are already documented; the description only restates diff semantics and viewport scoping (via 'elementos visibles'). Baseline 3 applies since the schema does the heavy lifting and the description adds no format or interaction detail beyond it.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: a compact list of visible elements with ref, role, name, state and center coordinates, explicitly 'sin captura' (without screenshot), which partly distinguishes it from browser_screenshot. It does not name browser_find or browser_element_at as the complementary lookup tools, so sibling differentiation is only implied.

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?

'PERCEPCIÓN PRINCIPAL' signals this is the default observation step and diff:true usage is explained, but there is no explicit guidance on when to pick this over browser_find, browser_element_at, browser_screenshot or browser_extract, and no stated prerequisites or exclusions.

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