browser_get_html

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It only restates the core behavior without disclosing error handling, return format, or side effects. For a read tool, the lack of information about what happens when a selector is not found or how HTML is serialized is a gap.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the key action and scope. No unnecessary words or redundant details.

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 retrieval tool, the description is adequate but thin. It doesn't mention the return format or when to prefer this over browser_get_text, and with no output schema, an agent may not know what to expect from the response.

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 provides descriptions for both parameters (selector and sessionId), including the note that selector gets full page HTML if not provided. The description adds no new parameter semantics beyond what the schema states, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (get), the resource (HTML content), and the scope (an element or the entire page). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like browser_get_text (text) and browser_get_attribute (attribute).

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?

No explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives like browser_get_text or browser_snapshot. The only usage hint is the optional selector returning full page HTML, which is more of a functional detail than a decision guide.

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