页面控制物清单

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses concrete behavioral details: it returns up to 40 controls and truncates text to 24 characters. This extra context helps the agent understand what to expect from the return value.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences that front-load the purpose and then provide usage context. It avoids unnecessary detail and is well structured.

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 that an output schema is present, the description does not need to explain return values. It sufficiently covers purpose, usage, and behavioral constraints, making it complete for the tool's scope.

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 descriptions already cover both parameters (frame and tab_id) with comprehensive explanations of defaults and allowed values. The tool description itself does not add any additional meaning to the parameters, so it stays at the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 that the tool lists interactive controls on the current page (buttons, inputs, dropdowns, links) with a limit of 40 items and text truncation at 24 characters. It also distinguishes this from precise interaction tools like find_element and element_click.

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 explicitly states when to use it: 'for first entering a page to quickly grasp available operations' and then suggests using find_element + element_click for precise interaction afterwards. This provides clear guidance on the intended workflow.

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