get_text

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states 'Read visible text.' It does not disclose that the tool waits for the element (timeoutMs), trims whitespace by default (trim), or only returns visible text (not hidden). No mention of return format or error handling.

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?

Extremely concise (one sentence) but at the cost of completeness. The description is front-loaded but lacks detail needed for a tool with nested parameters and many siblings.

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 complexity (3 params, nested selector object, no output schema), the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the return value type, behavior for missing/invisible elements, or timeout semantics.

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%, yet the description adds no meaning to any of the three parameters. It does not explain selector format, the trim effect, or timeout behavior. This is a critical gap.

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' clearly identifies the verb (Read) and resource (visible text). It distinguishes from siblings like get_attribute, get_page_source, and assert_text, but could be more explicit about returning text content rather than checking it.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as assert_text, get_attribute, or get_page_source. The description does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or context.

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