assert_text

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only states assertion behavior, but does not disclose what happens on failure (error vs boolean return), default timeout behavior, or whether it waits for element existence. Important context missing.

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?

Single short sentence, front-loaded. Acceptable for conciseness but lacks structure; doesn't earn its place fully as it omits critical details.

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?

Tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and moderate complexity. Description fails to cover behavioral semantics, parameter details, or return behavior. Highly incomplete.

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%, and description adds no explanation for parameters like selector, by, or timeout. Only 'equals or contains' hints at 'exact' parameter. Completely insufficient for agent to understand parameter 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?

Clearly states the tool asserts element text for equality or containment, with direct reference to the 'exact' parameter. Distinguishes from sibling tools like assert_attribute or assert_element_visible.

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?

Implied usage: when needing to verify element text content. No explicit guidance on when to use vs siblings like get_text or assert_page_contains, nor prerequisites or limitations.

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