browser_snapshot

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful context by disclosing the return format (ref handles) and the workflow dependency for click/type, but says nothing about snapshot freshness, staleness after navigation, or size limits.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the output format stated first and the usage trigger second. Every clause 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 no-parameter, read-only snapshot tool with no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns (ref handles) and when to reach for it. It could mention that refs become invalid after navigation, but nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond what the empty schema already conveys.

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?

Names a specific verb+resource (accessibility snapshot of the current page) and specifies the output shape ([ref=eN] handles), which distinguishes it from browser_screenshot and browser_get_text by implication. It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with those siblings.

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?

"Use it before clicking/typing" gives a concrete trigger condition and positions the tool in the interaction workflow. It does not state when-not to use it or name the visual/text alternatives (browser_screenshot, browser_get_text) explicitly.

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