chrome-devtools-mcp-mux

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

The description adds some behavioral context beyond the annotations: it explains that the snapshot is based on the a11y tree, lists elements with unique identifiers, and indicates the selected element in DevTools. However, with readOnlyHint=false (implying mutation), the description doesn't clarify what kind of mutation occurs (e.g., whether it modifies page state or just captures data). It also doesn't mention performance implications, rate limits, or authentication needs.

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 appropriately sized at 4 sentences. It's front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by important behavioral details and usage guidelines. Each sentence adds value: the first states what it does, the second explains the output format, the third gives usage preference, and the fourth adds context about DevTools integration. There's minimal waste.

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 moderate complexity (capturing page state with parameters), no output schema, and minimal annotations (only readOnlyHint=false), the description provides basic purpose and usage but lacks details about the snapshot format, how 'latest snapshot' is determined, what happens when saved to filePath vs. response attachment, or mutation implications. It's adequate but has clear gaps for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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%, so the schema already fully documents both parameters (verbose and filePath). The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema. According to scoring rules, when schema coverage is high (>80%), the baseline is 3 even with no param info in the description.

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 purpose: 'Take a text snapshot of the currently selected page based on the a11y tree.' It specifies the verb ('Take'), resource ('text snapshot'), and scope ('currently selected page'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from its closest sibling 'take_screenshot' beyond mentioning 'Prefer taking a snapshot over taking a screenshot,' which is a usage guideline rather than a clear functional distinction.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool: 'Always use the latest snapshot. Prefer taking a snapshot over taking a screenshot.' It explicitly compares to 'take_screenshot' and suggests a preference. However, it doesn't mention when NOT to use it or provide alternatives beyond the screenshot comparison, and it doesn't address other potential siblings like 'take_memory_snapshot'.

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