get_html

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

With no annotations, description fully carries burden. It discloses read-only nature, 50 KB cap, and error on no match. This is comprehensive behavioral info.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded, no wasted words. Every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema, description doesn't detail return format but outerHTML is standard. Capping is mentioned. Sufficient for a simple tool.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds a hint to scope tightly due to cap, which adds value but not a lot of new semantics.

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?

Description clearly states it returns the outerHTML of an element, with a usage hint distinguishing it from query_dom. The verb 'return' and resource 'outerHTML of an element' are specific.

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?

Explicitly says to use when query_dom output is insufficient and you need actual markup. Mentions read-only and error conditions. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use but the alternative is named.

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