ui-query

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

Annotations already declare read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent behavior. The description adds 'accessibility-first' hinting at a focus on accessibility properties, which is modest additional context beyond 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?

At only 4 words, it is too brief for a complex tool with multiple operations and parameters. Front-loading purpose is good, but the lack of structure and detail harms usability.

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 9 parameters, 3 operations, nested objects, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It omits critical information about selector syntax, tier meaning, grid parameters, return format, and operation semantics.

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 input schema has 9 parameters but only 33% coverage with descriptions. The tool description does not explain any parameters or operations (e.g., what 'dump', 'find', 'accessibility-check' do), failing to compensate for 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 'Query app UI.' states the general purpose but lacks specificity about the available operations (dump, find, accessibility-check) and does not distinguish from sibling tools like ui-action or ui-capture.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools (e.g., ui-action, ui-capture) exist but the description provides no criteria for selection or exclusion.

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