websex_browser_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose meaningful scope: only 'live' sessions and only those 'owned by this MCP process' are returned, so the agent knows other-process or dead sessions are excluded. It says nothing about what happens when no sessions exist, ordering, or size limits.

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 sentence with no filler, and the scope qualifiers are front-loaded after the verb-object core. Nothing is padded, though one clause of usage context would have fit without bloat.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the single-parameter surface is small. However, for a listing tool in a large browser-session family, the description omits the workflow relationship to browser_get/browser_close, leaving the agent to guess when this is the right entry point.

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% and there is only one required parameter, so the schema gives the agent only the name 'engagement_id'. The phrase 'for one engagement' confirms the parameter scopes the listing, but adds no format, validation, or example beyond that.

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?

Specific verb (List) plus resource (live browser sessions) with two clear scope constraints: sessions owned by this MCP process and scoped to one engagement. It is distinguishable from websex_browser_get/close/create by the plural, enumeration framing, though it never names a sibling 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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as websex_browser_get (fetch one session) or websex_browser_state. The purpose implies a discovery step before operating on a session, but the agent must infer that routing itself.

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