generate_selectors

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It simply says 'generate' without disclosing whether the operation is read-only, requires permissions, or what the output looks like. The minimal implication is that it computes selectors, but no explicit behavioral details are given.

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 concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient, earning a high score for structure despite being minimal in content.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description fails to explain the return value or the exact use case. The tool appears to be part of a selector generation workflow (given sibling tools), but the description alone does not provide enough context for an agent to know when to invoke it or what to expect as output.

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?

The schema already describes the elementData parameter as 'Element data from inspection', providing 100% coverage. The description does not add any extra information about the parameter's structure or expected format, so baseline 3 applies.

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 clearly states the tool's function: generating multiple selector variations for an element. It uses a specific verb ('generate') and resource ('selector variations'), distinguishing it from sibling tools that validate or inspect. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from auto_detect_field, which could also produce selectors.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like validate_selectors or auto_detect_field. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., having inspected an element first) or the workflow context.

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