browser_select_option

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

With no annotations, the description should fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states that the tool selects dropdown options, but does not mention behavior for multi-select, error handling (e.g., missing option), or whether it has side effects like custom events. Significant gaps remain.

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?

While extremely short, the description is underspecified for a tool with six parameters. Conciseness is not a virtue here as critical information is omitted. A more structured description with parameter hints or usage patterns would be appropriate.

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 complexity (six parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain parameter interactions, multiple ways to specify the option, or what the tool returns or fails on. It leaves the agent guessing.

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 add meaning to the six parameters. It only mentions 'ref' and 'selector', leaving 'index', 'label', 'value', and 'values' unexplained. The agent cannot infer how to properly combine or prioritize these parameters.

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 action ('Select') and resource ('dropdown option values'), and mentions the methods 'by ref or selector'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like browser_fill_form which handles input fields. However, it does not explicitly call out when to prefer this over other tools.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives like browser_fill_form or browser_check. The description lacks any context about specific use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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