browser_upload

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It mentions multiple file support and absolute path requirements, adding useful context. However, it does not discuss side effects, error behavior, or whether the upload replaces existing files, leaving gaps.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main action and clear instructions. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential usage. It could mention expected return values or asynchronous behavior, but it is generally complete for the tool's purpose.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions, and the description reinforces the selector and file paths. It adds the 'absolute file paths' requirement and 'one or more files' context, which goes slightly beyond the schema. This provides added semantic value.

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 uploads files to a file input element, using a CSS selector and absolute file paths. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like browser_navigate and browser_act, as it specifically targets file uploads.

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 clear context: use when you need to upload files to a file input element. It instructs to use a CSS selector and provide absolute paths, but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives. This is solid but lacks explicit exclusions.

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