websex_browser_create

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the context is isolated and headless (Chromium), and that the session ID is server-generated and engagement-bound. However, it omits session lifetime/expiry, resource cost, and whether a matching close is required to release resources.

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?

A single dense sentence that front-loads the core action and the returned artifact with zero filler.

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?

The presence of an output schema means return values needn't be explained, but for a 6-parameter session-creation tool with no annotations and 0% schema coverage, the description leaves too many gaps: parameter meaning, session lifecycle, and cleanup requirements.

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% across 6 parameters, and the description explains none of them. Only the 'engagement' binding hints at engagement_id; name, user_agent, extra_headers, and viewport dimensions are left entirely undocumented in both the schema and the description.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'Launch an isolated headless Chromium context' and clarifies it returns a session ID bound to an engagement. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like browser_navigate or browser_action, though it doesn't name those alternatives explicitly.

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 implies this is a session-creation step but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention that it must precede navigate/action calls, and no exclusion of alternatives. An agent must infer the lifecycle from the tool name alone.

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