get-element-styles

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Retrieves style information' without specifying whether these are computed styles, inline styles, what happens if the element is missing, or the format of the returned values. It does not contradict any annotations, but it is far too minimal.

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 a single, concise sentence with no redundant wording. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to scan, though some brevity comes at the cost of missing behavioral context.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description should provide more context about return values, computed versus inline style semantics, and error behavior. The schema covers the parameters, but the overall behavioral contract is incomplete for an agent deciding how to use this tool.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented with clear descriptions and an example for styleProperties. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Retrieves' and the resource 'style information of a specific element', making the tool's purpose understandable. It also differentiates well from sibling tools like get-element-properties and get-element-dimensions, though it does not explicitly contrast with them.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool over alternatives such as get-element-properties, get-element-html, or browser-evaluate. The name implies a use case, but the description offers no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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