browser_wait_for

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions waiting for states but does not explain timeout behavior, failure handling, or side effects. For a wait tool, more detail on what happens when the condition is not met is needed.

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 very concise (one sentence), which is good but comes at the cost of completeness. It is front-loaded with the core intent, but lacks important usage and behavioral details that would make it effective without forcing the agent to infer.

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 (multiple wait states, navigation, 5 parameters) and absence of an output schema, the description is too brief. It does not explain return values, error behavior, or how multiple wait conditions interact, leaving the agent under-informed.

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 100%, so all parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds high-level context ('appear or disappear') but does not augment parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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's purpose: 'Wait for a selector to appear or disappear, or wait for navigation.' It specifies the action (wait) and the target (selector/navigation), distinguishing it from sibling tools that perform actions like clicking or navigating.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to wait for visibility vs. just performing an action). There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or context-driven selection criteria.

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