page_waitElement

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions timeout and retry interval, but does not specify behavior on failure (e.g., timeout error), return value, or side effects. The description is insufficient for an agent to fully predict tool 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 concise at two sentences. It front-loads the primary purpose and then adds secondary features. No redundant information. However, it could be slightly more structured by separating core purpose from enhancements.

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 the tool has a complex 'connection' parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It omits explanation of the connection object, error handling, and return values. The description only covers selector semantics and basic retry/timeout, leaving major gaps.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning to the selector parameter by explaining the [index=N] syntax. It also states timeout and retry interval are 'enhanced' parameters. However, the complex 'connection' object is left unexplained, and other parameters lack context.

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 waits for an element specified by a selector to appear on the page. It mentions support for [index=N] syntax, which adds clarity about selecting specific elements. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from siblings like page_waitTimeout or page_getElement, which could lead to confusion.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, common use cases, or when not to use it. The sibling tools suggest broader workflow, but no explicit context is given.

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