chrome_page_text

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. 'Read the visible text' clearly indicates a read-only, non-destructive operation, and 'visible' distinguishes from hidden or raw HTML content. However, it does not mention truncation behavior or return format, though maxChars in schema hints at truncation.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys purpose and context without redundancy. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 the tool's low complexity and the schema's complete parameter coverage, the description provides sufficient context for an agent to understand what the tool does and when to invoke it. It lacks only minor behavioral details like error handling or explicit output format, but these are not critical for this simple read tool among siblings.

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?

The only parameter, maxChars, is fully described in the schema (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional meaning. The baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema handles parameter semantics and the description does not need to compensate.

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 'Read the visible text of the current page' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like navigate, locate, and eval. The added purpose context ('for understanding the app before scripting the demo') further clarifies its role.

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 clear context for when to use the tool ('for understanding the app before scripting the demo'), implying it should be used for reading page content rather than navigating or evaluating. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficient for typical usage decisions.

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