playwright__browser_snapshot

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond purpose: it does not say what the snapshot contains (accessibility tree), how it is returned, or how depth/box options affect output size. It also does not contradict the annotations.

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?

A single front-loaded clause with no waste; the trailing comparison earns its place by differentiating from screenshot, though it is informal and would be stronger stated as a concrete condition.

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 read-only tool with complete parameter docs and annotation coverage, the description is adequate but thin: it never says what an accessibility snapshot actually returns or why an agent would choose it over console messages, evaluate, or find, which matters since there is no output schema.

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% with four well-documented optional parameters, so the schema carries the burden. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what is already there, which is the baseline 3 case.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Capture accessibility snapshot of the current page') and explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling browser_take_screenshot, so an agent can pick between them without opening either schema.

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 phrase 'this is better than screenshot' implies the tool should be preferred for inspecting page content over visual capture, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance, no mention of prerequisites (e.g. needing a loaded page), and no other alternatives named.

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