browser_query_selector_all

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'return their information,' leaving unspecified what fields are returned (text, attributes, HTML), whether the result is an array, error handling for no matches, or any waiting behavior. This is a significant gap for a browser automation 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 sentence with no unnecessary words. It is direct and front-loaded, stating the verb and resource immediately. It could be more informative, but that is a matter of completeness, not conciseness.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description must explain return values. 'Return their information' is vague and incomplete, providing no detail on what 'information' includes or how it is structured. Given the low complexity, a short but more explicit description (e.g., 'returns array of objects with text, attributes, and HTML') would be expected.

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 already fully describes the sole parameter 'selector' as 'CSS selector' (100% coverage). The description adds 'all elements' but does not provide additional syntax or format details beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema handles the parameter meaning adequately.

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: 'Find all elements by selector' and the result: 'return their information.' This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like browser_get_text or browser_get_html, which focus on particular data types. It also implies multiple results via 'all elements.'

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: use this tool when you need to retrieve all elements matching a CSS selector and get their info. However, it offers no explicit comparisons or exclusions relative to sibling tools, such as browser_get_text for single-element text or browser_wait_for_selector for waiting. Usage context is only implicitly suggested by the purpose.

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