Adobe Firefly DOM Inspector

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden and delivers: 'This is a read-only tool that never navigates, clicks, or modifies the page.' This is a model of behavioral transparency, clearly stating safety guarantees. Additional context about inspecting shadow DOM and discovering selectors adds value.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. The most critical information (purpose, read-only guarantee) is front-loaded. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 has 12 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides a clear purpose and behavioral guarantee but lacks guidance on parameter interplay (e.g., which mode for which use case) and what the return value looks like. The description covers essential context but is incomplete for fully informed tool selection.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add significant parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides. It mentions some use cases (shadow DOM, selectors) that hint at parameter choices but does not elaborate on mode selection or other options.

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 verb 'inspect', the resource 'Adobe Firefly DOM state', and the purpose 'for debugging'. It explicitly distinguishes itself as a read-only diagnostic tool, differentiating from sibling tools like firefly_dom_watch (likely for monitoring changes) and firefly_debug_bundle (a broader debug collection).

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 explicitly states when to use: 'Use it to diagnose broken automation, discover selectors, and inspect shadow DOM.' This provides clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare with alternatives like firefly_dom_watch, leaving some ambiguity for agents deciding between tools.

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