Inspect Forms

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds context about capturing raw form data and warns about sensitivity (hidden values, personal data). No contradictions.

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?

Four concise sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: purpose, preconditions, next steps, sensitivity. No redundant information.

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?

Despite having output schema, the description fails to cover parameter semantics for 5 parameters. Given low schema coverage (0%), this is a significant gap that reduces completeness for effective tool invocation.

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 0%, yet the description only mentions acknowledgeRawCapture in preconditions. It does not explain the purpose of limit, maxBytes, selector, or textContains, leaving agents to guess filtering and other options.

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 retrieves form structure, labels, controls, values, validation state, and submit targets. It specifies the use case 'before reproducing a form issue', differentiating it from other browser inspection tools.

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 explicit preconditions (active page, acknowledgeRawCapture: true), guidance to filter forms, and next steps referencing sibling tools (browser_fill_form, browser_observe_action_result). Also notes sensitivity.

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