Select Option

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true, and the description reinforces this by warning that selection can submit forms or alter state. It goes beyond annotations by mentioning potential side effects (form submission, exposing values in traces) and suggesting next steps (inspect DOM/network). No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise (three sentences) and front-loaded with purpose and preconditions. The sensitivity note is useful but slightly dense. Could be improved by breaking preconditions into a list for readability.

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 0% schema coverage, the description should provide more detail about parameters and expected outputs. While it notes next steps, it omits return format, error cases, and detailed parameter behavior. For a tool with 3 parameters and potential side effects, this is insufficient.

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%, so the description should compensate, but it only hints at parameters ('intended value, label, or index') without explaining the complex schema for the 'values' parameter or describing 'selector' and 'timeoutMs'. The agent lacks guidance on how to structure input for multi-select or specifying options by index/label/value.

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: selecting one or more values in a native select control. It uses a specific verb ('select') and resource ('native select control'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like browser_click or browser_type.

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 mentions preconditions (active page, precise selector, value/label/index), which implies when it should be used. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use this tool. The 'Sensitivity' warning adds context but does not guide choice between tools.

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