chrome_query_selector_all

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

The description discloses core behavior (runs querySelectorAll, returns compact summary) but lacks details like whether the page must be fully loaded, side effects, or how the selector is determined. With no annotations, this is minimally transparent.

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 sentence with 16 words, efficiently conveying the core action and result. 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?

The tool lacks input parameters but requires a CSS selector to function. The description does not explain how the selector is provided, leaving a critical gap. For a zero-parameter tool with no output schema, this incompleteness is severe.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the schema covers everything. The description adds no parameter info, but given no params exist, baseline 4 is appropriate.

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 states it runs document.querySelectorAll and returns a summary, which is a specific verb and resource. However, it fails to mention how the CSS selector is specified, since there are no input parameters. This omission undermines clarity about what the tool actually does.

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 on when to use this tool versus siblings like chrome_evaluate_js or chrome_read_tab. It does not specify prerequisites or alternatives.

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