Expose account script queues to run batch implementations without restarting browsers or losing in-memory credentials; optionally refresh queues and set completion replay policy.
Expose account script queues without restarting browsers or losing memory credentials.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| refresh | No | ||
| completion_replay_policy | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.9.4Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses two useful behavioral claims — no browser restart and no loss of memory credentials — but omits critical context such as whether this mutates state, what permissions are required, and what happens to existing batch queues.
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 short, but that brevity comes at the cost of clarity. It is not front-loaded with a clear action or resource, and the single sentence is too vague to earn its place as the tool's complete guidance.
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?
Given the large sibling ecosystem, zero schema coverage, and no annotations, this description is inadequate. The output schema covers return values, but the description still fails to explain the operation's effect, parameter semantics, or usage context.
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 the description does not mention either `refresh` or `completion_replay_policy`. It adds no meaning beyond the parameter names, leaving the agent to guess the behavior of both parameters.
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 says it will 'expose account script queues' but does not clarify what 'load_batch_implementation' actually does — whether it loads, runs, or prepares a batch implementation. It also fails to distinguish the tool from siblings like start_learning_batch, resume_learning_batch, or implementation_status.
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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool, when not to use it, or which sibling tools are alternatives. The mention of avoiding browser restarts and credential loss implies a niche use case, but the agent is left to infer when that matters.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.