ie_text

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

Without annotations, the description is the sole source of behavioral info. It fails to mention side effects, permissions, or any limitations (e.g., whether text is extracted from the DOM after rendering, or if the tool waits for page load).

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, consisting of a single sentence. While this is efficient, it omits important details that could be structured for clarity, such as parameter explanations or return type.

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 no output schema, the description does not explain the return value format, behavior when no text is found, or how the 'limit' parameter affects output. This leaves the agent with insufficient information to confidently use the tool.

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 covers only 50% of parameters (frame has a brief description, limit has none). The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, leaving the 'limit' parameter completely unexplained.

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 that the tool retrieves visible text from a page or a specific frame, distinguishing it from sibling tools like ie_html (HTML) and ie_screenshot (visual). However, it could be more specific about what 'visible text' entails.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., ie_html for full source, or ie_get for attribute). There is no discussion of preconditions or expected outcomes.

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