browser_get_text

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'visible text' but does not define what constitutes visible (e.g., excludes hidden elements) or how the tool handles iframes, dynamic content, or pagination. It also omits session requirements and potential performance implications for large pages.

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 a single concise sentence, front-loading the core action. However, it is too brief to cover essential details, making it under-specified rather than efficiently complete. It could add more information without becoming overly verbose.

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 3 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and the complexity of browser operations (requiring session management, state handling, and potential large returns), the description is incomplete. It does not mention session requirements, return format, or error conditions, leaving significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's full behavior.

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?

The schema description coverage is 0%, and the description only hints at the 'selector' parameter ('optionally scoped to a CSS selector'). It does not explain the 'session_id' parameter (required for context) or the 'format' enum (text vs HTML). This forces the agent to rely solely on the schema names, which may be insufficient for correct invocation.

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 clearly states that the tool gets the page's visible text or HTML, and optionally scoped to a CSS selector. This is a specific verb-resource combination that distinguishes it from other browser tools like browser_snapshot (captures screenshot) and browser_evaluate (runs JavaScript). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from potential similar tools that might also return text content.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as browser_evaluate for extracting text via JavaScript, or browser_snapshot for visual capture. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., an active session) or contexts where this tool is preferred or should be avoided.

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