browser_explain_selector

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full burden. 'Diagnose' implies a non-mutating read, and it usefully describes the return content (count, samples, suggestions), but it omits any statement about permissions, tab targeting behavior, or whether it triggers page interaction.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with a clean verb–resource–payload structure; nothing redundant. It could be slightly more informative without losing tightness, but it wastes no words.

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 no output schema, the description is the only source of return-value context and it partially delivers (count, samples, suggestions). However, the tab_id parameter and any scoping behavior are left unexplained, leaving a gap for a tool that must be selected and invoked correctly.

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 0% for two parameters. The description mentions 'selector' implicitly via its subject but never explains the format or the role of the undocumented tab_id, so it fails to compensate for the coverage 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?

States a specific verb (diagnose) plus resource (CSS selector) and even previews the returned payload (match count, sample matches, suggestions). This distinguishes it from query tools like browser_find or browser_query, though it doesn't name any sibling explicitly.

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 'if you got too many' implies the diagnostic context (selector matched more than expected), but no alternatives are named and there is no explicit when-to-use vs when-to-pick-something-else guidance.

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