get_page_element

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It clearly indicates a read operation and enumerates the returned data fields (style, config, specials, events, bindings, responsive, children IDs). This provides useful behavioral context, though it does not explicitly address authentication prerequisites or error behavior.

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 sentence that leads with the action and scope, follows with an illustrative example, and concludes with the return payload. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 getter with two parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient detail about what the tool returns and how to specify the target element. It does not need to explain return values in deeper detail since the listed categories are informative enough.

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?

Both parameters are already described in the schema with 100% coverage. The description adds a small example for element_id, but this duplicates the schema's description. There is no additional semantic meaning for page_id. Baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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's function: retrieving full details of a single element by ID. It provides concrete examples of element IDs and lists the returned data categories. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'get_element', which may perform a similar function.

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 when to use the tool (when full detail of a single element is needed) but does not explicitly mention alternatives, exclusions, or when to prefer it over similar tools like 'get_element' or 'search_page_elements'. Usage context is implied rather than clearly stated.

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