browser_wait_for_selector

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 does not explain whether the tool polls, throws on timeout, returns immediately if the state is already satisfied, or has any side effects. The description only restates the basic waiting concept without operational detail.

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 sentence with no filler and a front-loaded verb. It is appropriately sized for a simple wait operation and contains no redundant or misleading content.

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 full input schema and presence of an output schema cover parameter and return semantics, so the description only needs to add operational context. It provides the core purpose but lacks any usage scenario or behavioral detail, making it minimally complete rather than fully robust.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning to the parameters, but the schema already documents selector as a CSS selector, state with its enum values, and timeout in milliseconds. No compensation is needed.

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 states a specific verb ('Wait') and a resource ('an element') with a condition ('reach a given state'). It is clearly distinct from sibling browser tools, none of which describe waiting for an element state. However, it does not explicitly mention the browser context, relying on the tool name.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as waiting before clicking or typing after navigation, or how to handle timeout situations. Usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name and general browser automation conventions.

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