style_find

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It indicates a read-only lookup operation that returns a uid, but it does not disclose behavior for multiple matches, the effect of the limit parameter, or error handling. The mention of the uid's purpose adds some context, but key behavioral details are missing.

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 that front-loads the action and output. It contains no redundant information and is well-structured for quick parsing.

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 8 parameters and no output schema, the description is under-specified. It does not state whether the function returns a single uid or an array, how criteria are combined (AND/OR), what happens when no match is found, or the meaning of the limit parameter. This is a significant gap given the lack of structured output information.

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 description maps the locator parameters (text, css, testId, role) to the Chinese translation '文案/CSS/testid/role', adding meaning beyond the schema. However, it does not explain the 'limit' parameter or how criteria combine, and schema coverage is only 38%. The description partially compensates but not fully.

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 finds elements by text/CSS/testid/role and returns a uid for use with style_styles/style_click. It effectively distinguishes itself from action-oriented siblings by positioning itself as the lookup step, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from style_inspect or style_status.

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 phrase '供 style_styles / style_click' implies this tool should be used before styling or clicking to obtain a uid. However, it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives like style_inspect.

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