resolve_uid_to_selector

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the tool is known to be non-destructive. The description adds a behavioral trait: 'Fails if stale', which warns about potential failure conditions. This adds value beyond annotations.

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 with two short sentences, each carrying significant information. There is no redundancy or fluff.

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 low complexity (one parameter, read-only, no output schema), the description covers the essential purpose and a key behavior. However, it lacks any mention of the return value or format, which is important since there is no output schema to clarify.

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 the parameter 'uid' is already documented as 'UID from snapshot'. The description does not add any additional meaning or constraints beyond what the schema provides.

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 uses a specific verb 'Resolve' and clearly states the resource: 'UID to CSS selector'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that perform actions on UIDs (e.g., click_by_uid, fill_by_uid) by focusing on the conversion rather than manipulation.

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 vs. alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention that this tool is useful when a CSS selector is needed for other tools, nor does it indicate when to use it over direct UID-based actions.

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