browser_snapshot

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

Discloses output type (structured DOM text) and truncation behavior with max_chars. With no annotations, the description carries the burden; it covers key behavioral traits but omits potential side effects (e.g., freezing on large pages) or performance details.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with the tool's core purpose. Every sentence earns 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?

Given 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose, scope control, and payload limit. Could elaborate on what 'structured DOM text' includes (e.g., attributes, text nodes) or default behavior, but schema partially fills gaps.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds practical usage hints ('narrow scope', 'avoids huge payloads') that repeat or lightly extend schema descriptions. Does not add significant new semantics.

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 'Accessibility snapshot (structured DOM text),' with a specific verb (snapshot) and resource (DOM). It distinguishes from sibling tools like browser_take_screenshot (visual) and browser_context_info (metadata).

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?

Provides some parameter guidance ('Use root_selector to narrow scope; max_chars avoids huge MCP payloads') but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use compared to sibling tools. The agent must infer from the name.

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