Browser Generate Locator

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 state whether the tool reads the page, whether it requires a live session, what kind of locators it returns (CSS, XPath, etc.), or whether it modifies state. The description is too terse to disclose any behavioral traits beyond the basic action.

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 short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it is under-specified: it earns its place but does not provide enough information to be genuinely useful. It is not verbose, but it sacrifices substance for brevity.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. An agent cannot tell what the locator suggestions look like, how they are returned, or what inputs are expected beyond the bare parameter names. For a tool with two required parameters and no structured output, more context is needed.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, but it does not explain what 'selector' means in this context (e.g., an existing selector to improve, or a target element description) or what sessionId refers to. The parameter names are self-explanatory to a degree, but the description adds no semantic value beyond the schema's field names.

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 and resource ('Generate locator suggestions for an element'), which is clear enough to convey the basic purpose. However, it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like browser_dom_query or browser_get_page_structure, which also deal with element identification and page structure. The title adds little beyond the 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention that it is for generating locator suggestions (e.g., for debugging or authoring selectors) or when a user might prefer browser_dom_query or browser_evaluate. The context is entirely implied by the tool name and description.

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