Get page snapshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It transparently states that the tool returns a YAML snapshot with roles, names, and states, implying a read-only operation. It does not discuss edge cases like stale snapshots or errors, but the core behavioral contract is clear.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The first sentence is front-loaded with what the tool returns and its format; the second explains the practical use case. Every word earns its place.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it specifies return format, content, and intended usage. The agent has enough information to select and invoke the tool correctly without needing additional context.

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%, with the single sessionId parameter fully documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, but none are needed because the schema already explains the parameter clearly.

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 states a specific verb ('Returns'), a specific resource ('YAML accessibility-tree snapshot of the session page'), and the content included ('roles, names, states'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_structure by focusing on the accessibility tree rather than generic page structure.

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 gives clear usage context: use it to discover roles/names to target with getByRole/getByText/getByLabel in click/type/check operations. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the intended workflow is clear.

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