get_selected_element

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It transparently reports what is returned and makes the read-only, stateful nature of the operation clear. It does not disclose edge cases like what happens when no element has been selected or whether the returned data may be stale.

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 dense, well-organized sentences: the first states the action, the second lists the returned artifacts. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail.

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 parameterless read-only tool with an output schema, the description sufficiently covers purpose and return values. It leaves only the no-selection edge case and prerequisite user interaction implicit, which prevents a perfect score.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to clarify. The baseline 4 applies because no parameter documentation is needed.

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 identifies the operation: it retrieves the last element the user selected or clicked in the browser. It also specifies the output content (metadata, locators, keywords), making the tool's purpose easy to grasp. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like get_selection_history or scan_elements.

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 intended use is implicitly clear: call this tool when you need the last user-selected element and its Robot Framework locators. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives such as get_selection_history, so the guidance is only implied.

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