Convert recorded Electron app steps into a Playwright test file snippet for automated testing.
Export recorded steps as a Playwright test file snippet
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| testName | No | ||
| sessionId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not say whether this is a safe read or a destructive/stateful operation, whether the snippet is returned inline or written to disk, whether recording must be stopped first, or what happens with an empty/invalid session.
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 no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity contributes to the gaps in other dimensions rather than being a strength of completeness.
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?
For a tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is insufficient. An agent knows the artifact type but not the session precondition, return channel, or side effects needed to invoke it 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for both parameters and does not. sessionId's meaning (to select the recorded session) and testName's role (naming the generated test) are left entirely unstated beyond the schema's type/format constraints.
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 ('Export') and resource ('recorded steps') with the output artifact ('Playwright test file snippet'). An agent can distinguish this from siblings like stop_recording, though it does not explicitly name the recording siblings it relates to.
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?
No guidance on when to use this versus stop_recording or start_recording, and no mention of prerequisites such as a session requiring recorded steps or a completed recording. The agent must infer the entire workflow context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.