get_visible_elements

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It states what is returned but does not disclose important behavioral traits such as performance impact, visibility filtering logic, or effects of parameters like maxDepth. Essential context is missing.

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 with two focused sentences, no fluff. However, given the complexity of the tool (9 parameters), it may be overly concise, but it is well-structured and front-loaded.

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?

Incomplete for a tool with 9 parameters and no output schema. It does not explain parameter meanings, return value format, or performance considerations. Multiple sibling tools exist but only one alternative is mentioned.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate but provides no information about any of the 9 parameters. Parameter names alone are insufficient for an agent to correctly use them.

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 it returns flattened visible accessibility elements from the UI tree, and explicitly positions it as a fallback after testID-first lookup, distinguishing it from siblings like get_elements_by_test_id.

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 explicit usage guidance: use as fallback after testID-first lookup. Does not elaborate on when not to use or compare with other siblings like get_ui_tree, but the primary use case is clear.

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