overlay_observe

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully reveals that the tool observes events across all iframes, operates within a limited window, and by default stops listening after sampling. This is meaningful non-obvious behavior, though it does not explicitly state whether the tool is read-only or describe side effects.

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?

Two focused sentences with no filler: the first states the scope and action, the second provides usage context and a key default behavior. Information is front-loaded and each sentence earns its place.

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?

The description adequately covers what the tool does, when it is appropriate, and a key behavioral default, and there is an output schema to describe return values. However, the complete absence of parameter semantics and explicit sibling differentiation leaves noticeable gaps for an agent trying to invoke it correctly.

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%, and the description does not explain stop, settle_ms, or max_results. The phrase about stopping after sampling hints at the stop default, but it does not actually define the parameters or their relationships. At 0% coverage, the description needed to compensate and did not.

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 states a specific action and resource: collecting Ant Design Portal/ARIA overlay events within a limited window and covering all iframes. This clearly distinguishes the tool's core function from general UI tools, though it does not explicitly contrast with the sibling overlay_scan.

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 says this is suitable for diagnosis after page interactions have been triggered by other tools or manual actions, and notes that it stops listening after sampling by default. This gives clear context for when to use it, but it does not mention alternatives or state when not to use it.

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