Select Element Option

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the mutation risk is known. The description adds the selection mechanism (by value/text/index) but does not disclose additional behavioral details such as timeout handling or side effects like triggering change events. This meets the baseline but adds limited context beyond 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 concise sentence of 13 words, immediately front-loading the core purpose and method. Every word earns its place, with 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?

The tool is simple and the output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, the description leaves ambiguities such as whether indices are 0-based or 1-based, and whether multi-select elements are supported. These details are also not in the schema, making the description marginally adequate for complete context.

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?

Schema coverage is 75%, with descriptions for 'by', 'value', and 'selector'. The description's phrasing 'by value, text, or index' is nearly identical to the schema's 'by' description, adding no new meaning. The 'timeout' parameter lacks a description and the tool description does not clarify its behavior, so the description does not compensate for that gap.

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 ('Select'), a clear resource ('option from a select element'), and specifies the method ('by value, text, or index'). It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like element_click or element_type, which serve different interaction purposes.

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 clearly states the intended context: selecting an option within a select element. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the specificity of 'select element' provides unambiguous guidance for when to use this tool over other element interaction tools.

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