browser_snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: overlays injection, screenshot capture, and dual return. It does not detail potential side effects (e.g., scroll behavior) but covers the main traits adequately.

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 concise sentences that front-load the core action and follow-up steps. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

The description explains the tool's purpose and output usage but omits explanation of the 'id' parameter and return format details (e.g., base64 or URL). Given the absence of output schema and annotations, more detail 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?

The schema has 3 parameters (id, quality, max_width) but the description adds no explanation. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description should clarify these parameters, especially 'id' (likely a tab reference). The defaults for quality and max_width are in the schema but their meaning is not explained.

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 specifies the tool injects overlays on interactive elements, takes a screenshot, and returns the screenshot and element refs. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like desktop_screenshot by focusing on browser interaction and Set-of-Mark prompting.

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?

It explicitly advises using browser_click_ref / browser_type_ref to interact after obtaining the snapshot, providing clear follow-up steps. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives for non-interactive pages.

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