browser_snapshot

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, covering the read-only safety profile. The description adds 'short-lived' refs, which is important behavioral context beyond the annotation, informing the agent that refs expire. It does not contradict annotations, though it does not disclose return format or other nuances.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds value: capture, accessibility/ARIA snapshot, short-lived actionable refs. It is 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?

With 5 parameters, no output schema, and only a one-sentence description, the tool's behavior is under-specified. It does not explain what boxes or depth control, what the snapshot returns, or how the actionable refs should be used. The short-lived nature is revealed, but overall completeness is lacking for an agent to use it effectively.

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 60%, with boxes and depth lacking descriptions. The tool description does not explain these parameters or compensate for the missing fields. While target, pageId, and sessionId have schema descriptions, the overall parameter semantics are incomplete for effective use.

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 a specific verb 'Capture' with resource 'accessibility/ARIA snapshot' and key feature 'short-lived actionable refs.' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like browser_take_screenshot (visual) or browser_get_text (plain text), 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?

The description implies usage when an accessibility snapshot is needed, especially to obtain actionable refs, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or when not to use it. Given the many sibling interaction tools, the context is somewhat clear but lacks explicit exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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