Find Shadow Elements

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true). The description adds the DrissionPage runtime context but does not mention behavioral details such as limit handling, return shape, or potential errors. With annotations present, this is adequate but not rich.

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, direct sentence with no redundant information. It conveys the essential purpose efficiently.

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 relatively simple and has an output schema plus annotations, so a one-sentence description is minimally viable. However, it does not clarify the distinction from shadow_find or elaborate on how limit and include_html affect behavior, leaving some contextual gaps.

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 provides descriptions for required params host_selector and selector, and the remaining params (limit, include_html) are self-explanatory by name. The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already conveys.

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 action (find), the target (repeated elements inside a shadow root), and the runtime (DrissionPage). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like shadow_find (singular) and element_find_all (non-shadow).

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 implies usage for retrieving all matching elements within a shadow root but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like shadow_find. No direct comparison or exclusions are provided, so usage context is only implied.

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