Better Playwright MCP

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. '创建新的浏览器页面' implies a write operation that creates a new page, but it doesn't disclose behavioral traits like: what happens after creation (does it become active?), whether it requires specific permissions, if there are rate limits, or what the return value is (since no output schema exists). The description is too minimal for a mutation tool.

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 ('创建新的浏览器页面') that directly states the purpose with zero waste. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, though its brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, behavioral implications, or usage context. For a tool that creates browser pages—potentially involving navigation and timing—more detail is needed to guide an AI agent effectively.

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%, with all parameters documented in the schema (name, description, url, waitForTimeout). The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 '创建新的浏览器页面' (Create a new browser page) clearly states the verb ('创建' - create) and resource ('浏览器页面' - browser page). It distinguishes from siblings like 'activatePage' (activates existing page) or 'listPages' (lists pages), but doesn't explicitly mention how it differs from other creation-related tools since none exist in the sibling list.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., whether a browser context must be active), when not to use it, or how it relates to sibling tools like 'browserNavigate' (which navigates existing pages) or 'listPages' (which lists existing pages).

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