playwright__browser_snapshot

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the 'accessibility snapshot' nature but does not disclose return formats or other behavioral details, leaving room for more context. No contradiction with 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?

The entire description is one concise sentence that front-loads the core action and includes a useful comparison. No filler or repetitive content.

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?

As a simple read-only tool with strong annotations and complete schema parameter descriptions, the description is mostly sufficient. It does not explicitly state the output format, but the schema's 'filename' parameter hints at markdown output, and overall complexity is low.

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 provides 100% description coverage for all four parameters, including meanings for boxes, depth, target, and filename. The description does not add parameter-specific value beyond what the schema already documents, so a baseline score of 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 uses a specific verb 'capture' and resource 'accessibility snapshot of the current page', clearly distinguishing the tool's function. The added comparison 'this is better than screenshot' differentiates it from the sibling screenshot tool, making purpose unambiguous.

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' gives explicit guidance to prefer this tool over a sibling when an accessibility snapshot is needed. However, it does not mention any exclusions or cases where a screenshot would be more appropriate, so it lacks a full when/not-when comparison.

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