dev_dom

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions, rate limits, or what happens if the selector fails. The agent has no insight into the tool's safety or performance characteristics.

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 extremely concise at three words, but it is under-specified to the point of being unhelpful. While brevity is valued, the lack of structure or expanded context means the agent cannot reliably invoke the tool.

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 the tool has 8 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and 52 siblings, the description is critically incomplete. It fails to explain return values, how to use boolean flags (total, text, inner, all) or how to specify attributes and CSS properties.

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 only 13% (only 'vault' has a description, defaulting to OBSIDIAN_READONLY_VAULT). The tool description does not mention any parameters or add meaning to the 8 parameters, leaving the agent to infer usage from parameter names alone.

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 'Query DOM elements' has a specific verb ('query') and resource ('DOM elements'), making the core action clear. However, it lacks context about which DOM (e.g., Obsidian's UI DOM) and does not differentiate from other query tools like 'dev_css' or 'dev_console'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the many sibling dev tools (dev_css, dev_errors, etc.). The description gives no context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess the appropriate use case.

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