browser_analyze_page

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. The term 'analyze' hints at read-only non-destructive behavior, but it does not explicitly state that the page is not modified, nor does it mention any safety or side-effect considerations. The lack of explicit behavioral disclosure is a notable gap.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action ('Analyze') and the resource ('current page structure'), with no filler or redundant wording. 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 low-complexity tool with fully described parameters, the description adequately conveys the core purpose. However, since no output schema exists, the description should provide some indication of what the analysis returns (e.g., a structured report or list of elements), and it does not. The behavior of maxDepth is also not clarified, leaving some expectations unmet.

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 input schema covers all four parameters with descriptions, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds general context about forms and interactive elements but does not explain parameter-specific behavior beyond what the schema already provides, so no additional credit is warranted.

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 the specific verb 'analyze' and clearly identifies the resource as the current page structure, forms, and interactive elements, with the goal of understanding page flow and functionality. It is clear and informative, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like browser_get_elements, which may overlap in functionality.

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 when to use the tool (when understanding page structure and flow is needed) but provides no explicit comparison with alternatives like browser_get_elements or browser_extract_text, nor any exclusions or conditions. The usage context is implied rather than explicitly stated.

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