get_element_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. The verb 'Récupère' implies a read-only operation and the listed outputs clarify what the agent can expect, but the description does not mention side effects, session requirements, or failure behavior, which would add transparency.

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 brief, front-loaded with the tool's primary purpose, and every sentence adds useful information. The parameter explanation is compact and directly tied to the only input.

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 single-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description provides enough about inputs and purpose. It lacks explicit prerequisite context such as requiring an active session, but the sibling connect_to_session helps fill that gap.

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 only provides a 'locator' string with no description, so the description meaningfully compensates by explaining the locator can be XPath, accessibility_id, id, etc. This is useful guidance beyond the raw schema.

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 ('Récupère') and resource ('toutes les informations d'un élément'), and enumerates concrete data categories such as text, position, size, attributes, visibility, and clickability. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like find_elements or tap_element.

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: an agent should call this when it needs detailed information about an already-located element. However, the description does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives such as find_elements or get_page_source for different needs.

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