Find

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: it is read-only ('without acting on them'), returns stable eid for interactive elements, semantic rd-* ids for text, and results as XML. No contradictions.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence adds essential information. No extraneous 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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description explains the return format (XML with eid or rd-*). With 6 parameters, schema descriptions cover them fully. The tool's two modes and relationship to snapshot are well-explained, making the description complete for an agent.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does mention parameters (kind, label, region, include_readable) but does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema's own descriptions. The value is in framing the overall modes, not enriching individual parameters.

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 locates elements or reads page text without acting on them. It describes two modes: filtering by kind/label/region for interactive elements, and using include_readable for text content. It distinguishes from snapshot, making the purpose precise and specific.

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 explicitly advises when to use this tool ('pinpointing a target before an action or pulling specific content') and provides a clear alternative ('use snapshot for the whole page'). This gives strong contextual guidance for choosing between tools.

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