browser_get_selector_plan

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool retrieves pre-computed data and mentions server-side caching and state fallback. However, it does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior or discuss side effects, permissions, or error conditions.

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 with two sentences, no filler, and directly front-loads the primary purpose. Every sentence adds meaningful information.

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 no output schema, the description should explain return structure. It only mentions 'primary + healed fallback locators,' which is vague. It does not cover what happens when the node is missing or the plan is empty, leaving gaps for an AI agent.

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?

Both parameters are documented in the schema (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining when to use the state parameter ('if querying offline' and 'defaults to last observed state'), which supplements the schema's description.

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 the tool retrieves a pre-computed selector plan for a semantic node, specifying it includes primary and healed fallback locators. This distinctively differentiates it from sibling tools like browser_act or browser_observe.

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 guidance on using the state parameter for offline queries, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like browser_find_targets or browser_observe. There is no when-not or exclusion criteria.

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