scan_website_ui

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 explicitly mentions using Playwright to open the URL and captures screenshots/DOM metadata, which conveys that this is an active browser automation operation with potential side effects like network requests and page execution. It also names the output artifacts, though it does not warn about failure modes or resource intensity.

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, dense sentence that front-loads the core action ('Open a URL with Playwright') and lists the key steps and outputs. It is concise with no redundant wording, wasting no tokens.

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 description gives a high-level overview of the process and outputs but omits details about the viewportPresets parameter and the exact structure/format of the optimization report. With no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequate but not complete enough for an agent to fully anticipate the response shape or handle edge cases.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the parameter meaning. It only mentions 'Open a URL' and 'capture screenshots,' but never explains the viewportPresets parameter or how it relates to the scanning behavior. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory (url, viewportPresets), but the description adds no additional semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 function with specific verbs and resources: opens a URL, captures screenshots and DOM metadata, runs deterministic UI checks, and returns a structured report. The combination of scanning and producing a follow-up prompt distinguishes it from the sibling generate_ui_fix_prompt, which likely only generates a fix prompt.

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 the tool is for analyzing a website's UI and getting optimization feedback, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling generate_ui_fix_prompt. The usage context is inferable but not directly stated, and no exclusions or alternative conditions are given.

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