get_page_map

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

No annotations provided, but the description fully discloses behavior: returns only truthy state fields, flags unnamed elements, caps output at max_nodes with a truncated flag. It describes the compact output format and the fact that it is read-only.

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?

Well-structured and front-loaded with the main purpose. The description is slightly verbose but each sentence adds necessary detail. Could be trimmed slightly but overall efficient.

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?

No output schema, but the description fully explains the return format: ensures agent knows what data is returned (ARIA role, accessible name, live state, CSS selector), how it's organized (document order), special flags (unnamed, hidden, truncated). Complete for agent to understand the tool's output.

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 coverage is 100% with good descriptions, but the description adds value: explains that max_nodes acts as a cap and that 'total' reports how many exist, and clarifies include_hidden's effect (flagged hidden). These enrich the schema.

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 it returns a semantic page map of interactive elements, landmarks, and headings in document order, with ARIA roles and accessible names. It distinguishes itself from get_page_elements by being a single call, and from find_element by providing a comprehensive map.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'use it to orient before clicking instead of multiple get_page_elements calls.' Provides clear context for its role as a fast orientation tool.

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