select_option

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the supported selection mechanisms, but does not mention timeout behavior, what happens when no option matches, how multi-select dropdowns are handled, or whether previous selections are cleared. These are notable gaps, though the core behavior is understandable.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action, target, and all three selection modes with no redundant words. It is easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 agent is left without information about return values or failure behavior. The description, together with the schema, covers the essential invocation details, but for a 6-parameter tool it would benefit from notes on option precedence, waiting, and error conditions.

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 50%: by, timeout, and selector are documented, while by_text, by_value, and by_index have no schema descriptions. The description partially compensates by mapping these three parameters to visible text, value, and index, but it does not clarify whether they are mutually exclusive or what happens if multiple are supplied.

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 action verb ('Select') and a clear resource ('an option from a <select> dropdown'), and explicitly names the three selection modes: visible text, value, or index. This clearly differentiates it from sibling interaction tools like click, type_text, or hover.

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 clear context: this tool is for interacting with <select> dropdown elements, not generic elements. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it falls just short of full guidance, but the target use case is unmistakable.

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