detect_horizontal_overflow

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior, but it only repeats the tool's name. It does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., boolean, list of overflows), whether it performs any side effects, or what inputs it requires beyond the schema.

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 extremely brief, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It merely restates the tool name without adding any new information, so the sentence does not earn its place.

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 overall description is inadequate for a tool that likely checks pages for overflow issues. It lacks context about what constitutes horizontal overflow, how results are reported, and when to use this tool among the many related inspection and analysis tools. The presence of an optional pathname parameter and no output schema makes the description even more insufficient.

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 schema defines a single 'pathname' parameter with a pattern and default, but the description gives no explanation of how or why it is used. With 0% schema description coverage, the description completely fails to compensate, leaving the agent to guess the parameter's meaning.

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 "Detect horizontal overflow" is a near-verbatim restatement of the tool name 'detect_horizontal_overflow', providing no additional specificity or distinction from sibling tools like detect_broken_images or run_visual_analysis. It fails to clarify what exactly is detected or in what context.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as inspect_page or capture_responsive_screenshots. The description does not mention typical use cases, prerequisites, or exclusion conditions.

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