playwright_html

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns HTML but does not mention the max_len truncation behavior, error conditions (e.g., no current page), or whether it is read-only. The phrase 'interactive session' only weakly implies session requirements.

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?

A single sentence with no filler words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it highly scannable and efficient.

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 simple getter, the description is mostly complete given the output schema exists. It conveys the core purpose and session context, but could add a note about max_len or the behavior when no page is available. Still, it is sufficient for a well-scoped 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?

The schema has no description for max_len (0% coverage), and the description does not mention it. The parameter name is somewhat self-explanatory, but the agent cannot know its exact effect (truncating HTML length) or how the default 20000 affects results.

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 uses a specific verb ('Return') and identifies the resource ('HTML of the current page'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like playwright_text and playwright_screenshot by focusing on raw HTML output.

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?

Usage is implied by the phrase 'current page in the interactive session,' suggesting use after navigating. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives like web_fetch or 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.