browser_extract_text

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the core function and does not mention return format, whether hidden elements are included by default, or any side effects. The includeHidden parameter hints at behavior, but the description itself adds no transparency.

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 succinct sentence that is front-loaded with the primary action 'Extract text content'. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundancy or filler.

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?

The tool is simple with two optional parameters, and the description plus schema cover the basic mechanics. However, without an output schema or annotations, the agent does not know the return format or details about hidden text handling. It is adequate but leaves room for improvement.

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 100%, as both selector and includeHidden have descriptions. The tool description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema, only repeating the CSS selector concept. It does not clarify selector syntax or behavior for missing elements, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action (extract text content) and the resource (current page or specific elements using CSS selectors). It immediately distinguishes itself from siblings like browser_navigate and browser_get_elements, which target navigation and element retrieval, respectively.

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 implicitly defines when to use the tool (when text content is needed) but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives such as browser_get_elements or browser_analyze_page. There is no mention of when not to use it or which sibling is more appropriate for non-text retrieval.

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