browser_get_html

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. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly confirm that, nor does it mention error handling, return format, or what happens with an invalid selector. This leaves important behavioral context undisclosed.

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 short sentence that directly states the tool's function. No filler or repetitive information, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

For a simple getter tool, the description gives the core purpose and the two modes (page or element). However, it lacks return format details, edge-case behavior (e.g., selector not found), and explicit confirmation of read-only nature. Given no annotations and no output schema, these gaps limit completeness, though the tool is simple enough to still be usable.

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%, so parameters are already well-documented. The description adds meaning by clarifying that omitting the selector returns the entire page HTML, while providing a selector targets an element. This goes beyond the schema, which only says 'optional'.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' with a clear resource ('HTML content') and scope ('page or an element'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like browser_get_text and browser_get_attribute by naming the exact data type returned.

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 implies usage for retrieving HTML rather than text or attributes, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings. There is no exclusions or alternative guidance, but the purpose is clear enough for an agent to infer basic usage.

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