browser_captcha_read

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: supports two recognition methods and falls back to returning image for manual review on failure/low confidence. It does not mention whether it modifies page state or requires specific page conditions, but the read-only nature is implied.

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?

Highly concise with three sentences, front-loading the core action. Every sentence adds meaningful detail without redundancy or fluff.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should explain return values. It mentions returning image for manual recognition but does not specify format or structure for successful extractions. For a tool with 3 optional parameters, it covers the main flows but lacks precise return details.

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 coverage is 100%, so all parameters have descriptions. The tool description provides no additional context beyond what the schema already states. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description adds no extra semantic value for parameters.

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?

Specifically states it reads captcha images from a page and supports two recognition methods (direct URL extraction and OCR), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like browser_captcha_detect (detection) and browser_captcha_screenshot (screenshot).

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?

Implies usage for reading captchas and differentiates between simple (direct extraction) and complex (OCR) cases. However, does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor mentions exclusions or prerequisites.

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