Find All Elements

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, which cover the safety profile. The description adds non-redundant behavioral details: outputs are 'bounded text/attribute summaries' and it returns 'recommended selectors', disclosing truncation behavior and an extra output feature. This adds meaningful context beyond the annotations.

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, well-structured sentence that leads with the core action. Every phrase earns its place: 'multiple matching elements', 'bounded text/attribute summaries', 'recommended selectors', and the use-case list. No redundancy or filler.

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 rich schema (3 params, 100% coverage), the presence of an output schema, and thorough annotations, the description is complete enough for an agent to correctly select and invoke the tool. It clearly communicates the tool's purpose and distinctive output characteristics, leaving only a minor gap in explicitly contrasting with element_find, which is already implied by 'multiple'.

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 input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, documenting selector, limit, and include_html. The description's mention of 'bounded text/attribute summaries' loosely relates to include_html but does not add direct parameter semantics. This is the baseline 3, as the schema carries the parameter documentation burden.

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 opens with 'Find multiple matching elements', a specific verb + plural resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling element_find by targeting 'repeated lists, cards, and tables'. It also previews the bounded summaries and recommended selectors, making the tool's purpose and scope immediately clear.

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 'for repeated lists, cards, and tables' provides clear context on when this tool is appropriate, which is a helpful usage guideline. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like element_find for single elements or state any exclusions, so it does not reach the full 5.

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