Select a dropdown option

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

Annotations indicate this is a mutating (non-readOnly) but non-destructive action. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond that—it mentions matching options by label or value but does not disclose side effects like triggering change events or that the element must be visible/enabled. With annotations covering safety, the description is adequate but not rich.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that directly states the core function and key matching strategies. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or redundancy.

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 tool's complexity (nested target object, multiple parameters, no output schema), the description is thin. It does not explain how to locate the select element via target, potential errors, or return behavior, but the rich schema compensates partially. The description is sufficient for a straightforward tool but leaves gaps for edge cases.

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 high (83%), and the description summarizes the two key parameters (labels and values) as 'visible label or by value.' This adds slight clarity but largely mirrors existing schema descriptions, providing little extra value beyond the baseline.

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 tool selects one or more options in a <select>, using a specific verb ('Choose') and resource ('<select>'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like browser_click or browser_type by focusing specifically on dropdown option selection.

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 description implies usage by stating its function, but does not explicitly say when to use it over alternatives. It lacks guidance on when not to use it or how it compares to related tools like browser_click for interacting with dropdowns.

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