browser_select

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

No annotations are provided, and the description lacks behavioral details such as whether it clears previous selections, supports multiple selections (implied by array but not stated), or waits for elements. The agent has no information on side effects or error handling.

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 one short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded with the action. However, it lacks structure and could benefit from additional details without being verbose.

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, no annotations, and minimal parameter explanation, the description is incomplete. It does not describe return values, error conditions, or behavioral nuances like handling of multiple selections or invalid references.

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, but it only says 'addressed by ref' and 'Select one or more options'. It does not explain what 'ref' is (selector format) or what 'values' represent (option values, labels, or indices). Minimal added meaning.

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 verb 'Select' and the resource 'options in a <select>' addressed by 'ref'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like browser_click or browser_type which do different actions. However, it does not clarify what 'ref' refers to (e.g., CSS selector), slightly reducing clarity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The description does not mention that it is specifically for <select> elements, nor does it exclude other uses. No prerequisites or context provided.

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