wpf_find_elements_deep

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose two important behaviors: unbounded result sets and the guard against returning the entire tree. It omits return format, performance/rate implications of an unlimited deep traversal, and any permission requirements, leaving meaningful gaps for a potentially expensive operation.

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?

Front-loads the distinguishing trait (deep search, no limit) and then the safety constraint. Dense and purposeful with little waste, though the filter enumeration is somewhat list-like.

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 7 undocumented params, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers matching semantics and scoping adequately. It still leaves the return value (presumably a list of element handles) and the practical cost of unbounded traversal unstated.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does well: it specifies matching semantics for the key filters (automation_id exact case-sensitive, type_name partial, element_name x:Name substring, text visible content) and the role of visible_only and root_handle. Only property_filter's shape is left unexplained.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (deep search for all elements) and distinguishes itself from the sibling wpf_find_elements via the 'no result limit' trait and 'Same filters as' reference. The core action is unambiguous, though it leans on the sibling for the full picture rather than fully standing alone.

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?

Provides a hard usage constraint ('Requires at least type_name, element_name, text or automation_id') and a scoping hint ('Use root_handle to limit scope'), which is useful guidance. However it never explicitly says when to prefer this over wpf_find_elements or the reverse, so the routing decision is only implied by the 'no result limit' remark.

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