page_snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool is a read-only census (implied, not explicit), token-budgeted, and provides stable uids. However, it does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive or whether it requires permissions, which would be ideal. Nevertheless, the behavior is well implied and no contradictions exist.

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?

Three sentences, each adding value: purpose, when to call, and when to use alternatives. Front-loaded with core function, no wasted words. Highly efficient.

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 tool's complexity (3 parameters, nested object) and no output schema, the description explains the output nature (element tree with geometry/visibility), token budget, and usage context with clear alternatives. It lacks a detailed node structure, but covers the essential needs for an agent 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context like 'token-budgeted' and explains that scope limits to one subtree, but does not significantly elaborate on parameter details beyond what the schema provides. It is adequate but not exceptional.

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 function: a token-budgeted census of the rendered page returning a nested, uid-keyed element tree with geometry and visibility flags. It explicitly distinguishes from siblings like find_elements and annotated_screenshot, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: 'Call this FIRST after connect' and 'Reach for it whenever you do not yet know the page structure or an element uid.' It also tells when to use alternatives ('To find one specific element by description use find_elements; to see the page visually use annotated_screenshot'). This is model usage guidance.

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