is_element_selected

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses return format (true/false), supported element frameworks (UIA, Java Swing), and a key behavioral limitation (indeterminate returns false). No contradictions with 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?

The description is extremely concise: two sentences and a note. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second clarifies scope and return, and the note adds a critical caveat. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a simple one-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, its return value, supported element types, and a key limitation. The agent has all necessary information to use it correctly.

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 one parameter elementId already described as 'Element ID returned by find_element'. The description adds no further meaning to the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool checks if a checkbox, radio button, or toggle is selected, specifying support for UIA and Java Swing elements. It distinguishes from siblings like is_element_displayed by focusing on selection state and includes a specific limitation about indeterminate states.

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 implies use when checking selection state but does not explicitly compare to alternatives like get_attribute or other is_* tools. It provides no when-not-to-use guidance, only a limitation about indeterminate checkboxes.

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