find_element

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true; the description adds behavior like 'Returns an error if not found' and gives a strategy priority list. It does not contradict annotations and provides useful behavioral context beyond the structured annotation alone. A minor gap: no mention of potential side effects (though read-only implies none).

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 a single well-structured paragraph with a numbered list for strategy order. Every sentence serves a purpose: purpose, return value, error behavior, strategy ranking, and post-use advice. No redundancy; front-loaded with core action.

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 no output schema and a moderately complex set of sibling tools (find_elements, find_child_element), the description leaves gaps: it doesn't specify if multiple matches cause an error or return first match; it doesn't contrast with find_child_element; the return value ('element ID string') is vague. The strategy guidance partially compensates, but completeness is adequate but not thorough.

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% with detailed enum descriptions for 'strategy' and a description for 'selector'. The description adds value by recommending an order of strategies and suggesting post-use call to 'get_element_info', which helps the agent use parameters effectively. The added context is meaningful but not essential given the already rich schema.

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 'Find a single UI element in the current app window' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling 'find_elements' (plural) but does not explicitly contrast with 'find_child_element' or clarify behavior when multiple elements match (e.g., returns first or error).

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 provides a 'Preferred strategy order for reliable automation' and recommends calling 'get_element_info' after interaction, which guides parameter selection. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings like 'find_elements' or 'find_child_element', leaving the decision partially implicit.

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