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 of behavioral disclosure. While it mentions the tool returns a '语义化简化快照' (semantic simplified snapshot) with '清晰的缩进结构' (clear indented structure), it doesn't explain what 'semantic simplification' means, whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions might be needed, or how the output is structured. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral questions unanswered.

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 very concise - just one sentence in Chinese. It's front-loaded with the core purpose. While efficient, it might be too brief given the complexity of what 'semantic simplified snapshot' implies and the lack of other documentation.

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 that this is a tool with no annotations, no output schema, and a potentially complex operation (semantic simplification of page content), the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'semantic simplification' entails, what format the output takes, or how this differs from other snapshot tools. The description leaves too many questions unanswered for effective tool selection and use.

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 description provides no information about parameters. However, with 100% schema description coverage (the single parameter 'pageId' has a description in the schema), the baseline score is 3. The description doesn't add any value beyond what's already documented in the input schema.

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's purpose: '获取页面的语义化简化快照' (get a semantic simplified snapshot of a page) and '返回清晰的缩进结构' (return a clear indented structure). It specifies the verb (获取/get) and resource (页面/page), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'captureSnapshot' or 'getPDFSnapshot' which might serve similar purposes.

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. With sibling tools like 'captureSnapshot', 'getPDFSnapshot', and 'getScreenshot' that might produce different types of page snapshots, there's no indication of what makes this tool unique or when it should be preferred over those options.

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