get_text

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It specifies 'visible text' implying hidden text is ignored, but does not disclose behavior on element not found, waiting, or what 'visible' means precisely. Some transparency, but not comprehensive.

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 single-sentence description is concise and front-loaded with the core purpose, but it is too brief given the tool has 4 parameters and no additional context. It earns its place but lacks structure.

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's complexity (4 parameters, nested object, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It omits parameter explanations, return value, and behavioral details.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. It mentions none of the 4 parameters (ref, trim, selector, timeoutMs), adding no value beyond the schema.

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 'Read visible text from an element' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_attribute (reads attributes) or get_title (reads document title).

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 vs alternatives like get_attribute or execute_script, nor does it specify when not to use it or mention prerequisites.

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