browser_element_is_selected

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic function, omitting key details like: what the tool returns (boolean?), whether it waits for the element (timeout param suggests yes but not stated), and how it handles missing elements or ambiguous 'selected' state for non-interactive elements.

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 sentence, making it concise. However, it is under-specified; adding a brief note about return type or behavior would improve informativeness without losing conciseness.

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 lack of an output schema and the tool's simplicity as a boolean check, the description should include the return value (boolean). It also does not explain implications of the timeout parameter. The description is too sparse for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides, but it does not miss anything either.

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 'Checks if an element is selected' clearly states the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like browser_element_is_displayed or browser_element_is_enabled, which check other states. However, it does not elaborate on what 'selected' means (e.g., for checkboxes or options), leaving some ambiguity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., browser_element_is_displayed for visibility, or browser_get_attribute for custom attributes). The agent must infer context from the tool name alone.

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