webview_select_element

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, so no contradiction. The description adds behavioral context: requires driver_session, targets connected apps, and returns detailed element data. It doesn't detail all side effects but is adequate given annotation coverage.

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 four sentences with clear front-loading: core purpose first, then return details, then prerequisites and targeting. No redundant 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?

For a tool with 3 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the interaction flow, return data, and targeting. Missing error handling or edge cases, but sufficient for an 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description reinforces appIdentifier usage but doesn't add new meaning beyond the schema descriptions. No extra semantics needed.

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 activates a visual element picker overlay for Tauri apps, returning rich metadata and an annotated screenshot. This distinguishes it from siblings like webview_find_element (programmatic selection) and webview_get_pointed_element (point-based).

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 specifies prerequisites (active driver_session) and targeting rules (connected app, default app, appIdentifier). It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide when to use this visual picker.

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