Optimize Selector

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds a useful sensitivity warning: 'candidate analysis reads DOM attributes and text that may be sensitive.' This provides behavioral context beyond the annotations, earning a score above baseline.

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 extremely concise: three sentences covering purpose, preconditions, next step, and sensitivity. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or filler.

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?

While the description provides high-level context and a sensitivity warning, it omits details about the output (which is partially covered by an output schema) and the many parameters. For a tool with 8 parameters and no parameter descriptions, more guidance on how to construct a good request would improve completeness.

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%, yet the description only mentions two parameters (selector and acknowledgeRawCapture) without explaining their semantics or usage. Six other parameters remain entirely undocumented. The description fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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: to optimize a selector to be shorter and unique for a known target. The verb 'optimize' and resource 'selector' are specific, and no sibling tool performs this function, so it is well-differentiated.

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 clear usage context: 'Use when a full-profile workflow needs a shorter unique selector.' It lists preconditions (active page, acknowledgeRawCapture true, valid selector) and a next step (verify with browser_get_elements). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, which would be helpful.

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