Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• navigate_urlC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only mentions navigation and vague analysis, omitting crucial details such as whether the current session state is replaced, whether an active session is required, or how retries and fallbacks work. This is insufficient for a navigation tool with side effects.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence and is relatively concise. However, the clause 'and analyze sections and internal links' is unqualified and may confuse readers, making it slightly less efficient than an ideal concise description.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The tool has five parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, making the description responsible for explaining the navigation lifecycle and session behavior. It fails to cover retry semantics, timeout behavior, or the meaning of 'analyze'. This is inadequate for the tool's complexity.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides, but it doesn't need to since the schema is thorough. No bonus or penalty is warranted.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the primary action: navigating to a URL within a server-managed session. It distinguishes from siblings like click_element and get_content by focusing on navigation. However, the added phrase 'and analyze sections and internal links' is vague and could imply additional behavior beyond simple navigation.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like run_playwright. The mention of 'server-managed session' implies a session context, but there is no explanation of prerequisites, exclusions, or comparative use cases.

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

• click_elementB
  3.3/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It only mentions 'server-managed session' but fails to state what happens on element not found, whether it waits for interactability, or if it modifies the current page state. The description is too sparse for a browser automation tool.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that directly states the purpose with no extraneous words. It earns its place entirely.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The tool is simple with one param and no output schema, but the description omits important context such as session prerequisites, error behavior, or return value. While it is minimally viable, there is a clear gap in behavioral details that could confuse an agent.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% and the selectors parameter is self-explanatory ('CSS selector of the element to click'). The description does not add further meaning beyond the schema, 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.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool's action ('Click on elements') and the resource it operates on (via a server-managed session). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like navigate_url, get_content, and close_session, which have different verbs and purposes.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this should be used for simple clicks in the current session or when to prefer run_playwright over this. Lacks any explicit or implicit usage context.

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

• get_contentB
  3.3/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It adds only the context of a 'server-managed session', but does not disclose the return format, error behavior, or any side effects. While 'extract' suggests read-only, it is not explicitly stated.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence, front-loaded with the main purpose, and contains no superfluous information.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides the essential purpose and session context. However, it omits details about the return value or any conditions under which content extraction might fail, leaving some ambiguity.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The schema already documents the only parameter (selector) with a clear description: 'CSS selector to extract content. If omitted, extracts full page'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, matching the baseline for 100% schema coverage.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the action ('Extract content') and the target ('the page'), using the server-managed session. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like navigate_url (navigation) and click_element (interaction). It lacks an explicit comparison, but the verb and resource effectively convey the tool's role.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies this is the tool for retrieving page content within the session, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives such as run_playwright or when not to use it. The usage is inferred from the name and siblings rather than stated.

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

• run_playwrightA
  3.5/5.0
  Behavior2/5

  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 mentions the server-managed session but does not disclose potential side effects, security implications, error handling, or that arbitrary code execution can be destructive or alter session state.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. There is no unnecessary information or repetition.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The tool is powerful and complex, and while the schema covers parameters adequately, the description lacks critical context about what happens after execution, the return value, or how the code interacts with the session. It is minimally viable but has clear gaps.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool executes custom async Playwright code using a server-managed session. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that perform specific browser actions like navigation or clicking.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies it is for custom code scenarios not covered by the more specific sibling tools, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions.

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

• close_sessionA
  3.8/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It states that it closes all browser sessions and clears the current session, implying a destructive/cleanup action. However, it does not elaborate on side effects (e.g., unsaved data loss), whether it requires confirmation, or the impact on any ongoing Playwright operations. The description is upfront about the core action but lacks additional context.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence that is front-loaded with the action verb. It communicates the essential information without redundancy (though 'clear current session' adds specificity). No fluff or irrelevant details.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Despite being a simple tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description gives a clear indication of the tool's purpose and effect. It could be enhanced by noting the return value or any side effects on the underlying server, but for a straightforward close operation, the description is sufficiently complete.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain. According to the baseline for 0-param tools, a 4 is appropriate because the description does not need to compensate for missing schema information.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool's action with a specific verb ('Close') and resource ('all browser sessions managed by the server'). It also adds 'clear current session' to specify a related action. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like navigate_url or click_element, which perform page interactions rather than session management.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or scenarios where a different tool would be more appropriate. For example, there is no mention of using it before starting a fresh session or as part of cleanup.

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