读取页面文本

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

With no annotations, the description itself must disclose behavior. It does state the read action and default selector, but does not mention whether the operation waits for the element, what happens on no match, or what the returned value looks like beyond being the innerText.

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 captures the core behavior and the default case with zero redundancy. It is appropriately compact for such a simple tool.

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 simple optional-parameter read tool, the description covers the essential behavior and default. It relies on the schema for note/pageId semantics, which is acceptable given 100% schema coverage, though return-value details are not explicitly stated.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds only the default-body behavior for selector, which the schema also already states, providing no meaningful extra semantics.

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?

Description clearly states the tool reads innerText of the element matching a CSS selector, defaulting to the whole body. This precisely distinguishes it from siblings like get_screenshot, get_dom_snapshot, and get_console.

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 is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_dom_snapshot or get_console. The description only explains mechanics, not selection criteria or context.

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