Wait for Element

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds selector interpretation context (bare CSS vs text:) but does not disclose timeout error behavior or return semantics. No contradiction with 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, front-loaded sentence that states the core purpose and the most important selector nuance. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 a rich schema (including selector object variants) and output schema present, the description is adequate for basic usage. However, it lacks explicit differentiation from other wait tools (wait_until, wait_time), which would improve completeness in tool selection.

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 description coverage is 100%, with detailed descriptions for timeout and selector, including bare CSS and text: prefixes. The tool description essentially repeats selector guidance from the schema, adding no new parameter information.

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 waits for an element to appear on the page, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling wait tools like wait_time and wait_for_url by focusing on element presence, and adds selector syntax details.

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 (wait for element appearance) and provides selector format guidance, but gives no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives like wait_until or wait_time. Sibling tools are visible but not referenced, so the agent must infer the distinction.

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