Browser Wait For Selector

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, but it only restates the wait behavior. It does not disclose default state, polling behavior, timeout failure behavior, or whether errors are thrown when the condition is not met.

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 text is short, but this is under-specification rather than concise completeness. It is a single vague sentence that provides no structured defaults, examples, or conditions.

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 tool with 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is far from complete. An agent could not tell what happens on failure, what the default wait condition is, or how the result is returned.

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 for all four parameters. It adds no meaning beyond the parameter names: it does not explain what 'state' values mean, what timeout defaults to, or what sessionId represents.

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 identifies an operation ('wait') and a resource ('selector'), and hints at a condition ('state'), so it is not a pure tautology. However, 'reach a state' is vague and does not specify possible states or what success looks like, and it doesn't clearly distinguish this from the sibling browser_wait_for_timeout.

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 given for when to use this tool versus alternatives such as browser_wait_for_timeout or browser_snapshot. The agent must infer usage from the name and schema rather than from the description.

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