Server has 20 tools with explicit schemas and descriptions, but quality is inconsistent. Core tools (start_browse, act, act_get) have detailed descriptions (150-300 chars) with clear intent guidance. However, 12 UI verification tools (click, evaluate_js, hover, etc.) have minimal descriptions (20-50 chars) that lack context for LLM selection. Parameter descriptions are present but often generic ('CSS selector or XPath for the element'). No output schemas documented. Error handling guidance absent. Tool composition shows some issues: navigate appears in both server.py and ui_verification.py (duplication risk); click/type_text/press_key lack session_id context, making their relationship to browser sessions unclear. No tool annotations (readOnlyHint/destructiveHint) despite clear risk levels in metadata.

• Expand descriptions for UI verification tools (click, hover, press_key, etc.) to 100-150 chars explaining when to use each vs act(), and clarifying session_id requirements.
• Document output schemas for all tools. E.g., start_browse returns {status, content, session_id, method, url, final_url, metadata}; act returns {status, result, screenshot_path}.
• Add session_id parameter to click, type_text, press_key, hover, navigate, scroll, evaluate_js, or clarify if they operate on a global/implicit session context.
• Add error handling guidance to tool descriptions: 'If selector not found, try act() with a natural language description instead.' Include retryable vs fatal error classification.
• Implement tool annotations: mark act, click, type_text, press_key, evaluate_js as destructiveHint=true; mark get_page_content, screenshot, verify_* as readOnlyHint=true.