Better Playwright MCP

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the action ('关闭') but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether this is destructive (likely yes, as closing a page typically removes it), what happens if the page doesn't exist, or if there are side effects (e.g., affecting other pages or browser state). This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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, efficient sentence ('关闭指定的页面') that directly states the tool's purpose without any wasted words. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple tool, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the complexity (a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks information on behavioral traits (e.g., destructiveness, error handling), usage context versus siblings, and output expectations. For a tool that likely modifies browser state, this leaves the agent with insufficient guidance to use 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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'pageId' documented as '页面ID' (page ID). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or context about where to obtain the ID. With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description doesn't compensate with extra insights.

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 action ('关闭' meaning 'close') and the resource ('指定的页面' meaning 'specified page'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'closeAllPages' or 'closePageByIndex', which would require mentioning that this tool closes a single page by ID specifically.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'closeAllPages', 'closePageByIndex', or 'closePagesWithoutId'. The description only states what it does, not when it's appropriate or what prerequisites might exist (e.g., needing an open page with the specified ID).

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