browser_snapshot

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true (safe read) and openWorldHint=false. Description adds valuable details: default cap at 250 elements, truncated flag, and that elements include CSS selector refs for interaction. No contradictions.

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?

Two concise sentences. First sentence packs essential purpose and output details. Second sentence adds usage nuance. Every word earns its place, no redundancy.

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, but description fully explains what is returned (url, title, elements with specific properties plus refs). Covers behavior (cap, truncated). For a read-only snapshot tool with one optional parameter, this is complete.

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 a well-described `limit` parameter. Description reinforces its purpose by explaining when to raise it (dense pages with large tables/long forms) and the consequence of truncation (truncated:true meaning cap hit). Adds context beyond 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?

Explicitly states capturing a structured snapshot with specific details (url, title, interactive elements with role, name, state, heading, CSS selector ref). Clearly distinguishes from sibling browser_screenshot by saying 'Prefer this over browser_screenshot to find and target elements reliably.'

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?

Provides clear when-to-use guidance (find and target elements reliably) and when to adjust limit (dense pages). No explicit when-not-to-use, but comparison with browser_screenshot implies alternatives. Could be more explicit about other siblings like browser_eval, but sufficient.

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