ui_analyze_scope

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It openly discloses cropping behavior, iframe handling, and the fact that it does not expand the entire DOM. It does not explicitly state read-only/side-effect status or failure behavior, but the scoping caveats provide solid transparency.

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?

Three short sentences front-load the core purpose, then add conditional behavior and output format with no fluff. The structure is easy for an agent to parse and every 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?

With an output schema present, the description does not need to detail return fields. The main gaps are undocumented parameters and no explicit alternative routing, but the scope, cropping, and iframe behavior are well covered, making it near-complete.

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 never mentions max_controls or max_overlays or how they affect the scan or result size. The compact-list promise only indirectly relates to max_controls, so the description does not compensate for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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 ('analyze') and a bounded resource: operable controls within the current active page or focused overlay. It also distinguishes itself from full-page DOM inspection by promising a compact role/name/CSS locator list, which clearly separates it from siblings like ui_snapshot or ui_page_context.

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 concrete conditions: when Modal/Drawer/Dropdown/Popover is present it crops the underlying page, otherwise it scans the top-level document and active AntD Tab iframe. This gives clear context for when the tool applies, but it does not explicitly name 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.