smartFindElement

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 states 'Returns ranked candidates' but omits the tool's optional action execution (e.g., click, type) and the minConfidence threshold behavior that could auto-execute actions. This is a significant gap for a tool that might perform side-effectful operations.

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 exceptionally concise with exactly two sentences. 'Find elements with natural language' states the core purpose, 'Returns ranked candidates' describes output, and 'Prefer analyzePage for better performance' gives useful guidance. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

The description is partially complete: it explains the find and return behavior but omits the optional action automation and confidence-based skipping which are key aspects of the tool's functionality. The schema covers these details, but the description alone would not give a full picture. Without an output schema, it does mention 'ranked candidates' which is helpful.

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 provides 100% description coverage for all parameters, including detailed explanations of 'description', 'action', 'maxResults', and 'minConfidence'. The description adds no extra parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already gives, so baseline 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Find elements with natural language' and that it 'Returns ranked candidates.' This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like findElementsByText and click. The mention of analyzePage as an alternative further differentiates it.

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 gives explicit guidance to 'Prefer analyzePage for better performance,' which is a clear alternative recommendation. However, it doesn't outline specific when-to-use or when-not-to-use scenarios beyond performance, so it's not fully exhaustive but still provides useful context.

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