capture_page

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'capture structure' without explaining side effects (e.g., does it modify the DOM?), performance impact, or any destructive potential. The lack of detail undermines transparency.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It conveys the core purpose efficiently and is appropriately front-loaded with the key action.

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 tool has only one parameter and no output schema or annotations, the description should provide more context about what 'stable refs' means, how they are returned, and usage patterns. The minimal description leaves ambiguity about the tool's output and integration with follow-up actions.

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 input schema has one parameter 'maxElements' with no description. The tool description does not mention any parameter, so it provides zero additional meaning beyond the schema. With 0% schema coverage, the description must compensate but fails entirely.

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 'capture page structure with stable refs...' which clearly states the verb-resource combo. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'take_screenshot' or 'find_element' by emphasizing reusable selectors and stable references.

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 implies use for obtaining stable references for future actions, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'find_element' or 'selector_hint_save'. No exclusion criteria are given.

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