agent-browser-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It clearly indicates this is a read-only operation (getting a path) and specifies the output type (absolute path). However, it doesn't disclose potential behavioral aspects like error conditions, permissions needed, or whether the path always exists.

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 a single, efficient sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's perfectly front-loaded with the core action and includes just enough context about the use case.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, has output schema), the description provides adequate context about what the tool does and why. However, it could be more complete by mentioning what happens if no extension directory exists or clarifying the exact output format beyond 'absolute path'.

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 with 100% schema description coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since none exist, focusing instead on the tool's purpose and output.

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 states the specific action ('Get absolute path') and resource ('unpacked Chrome extension directory'), with explicit purpose ('for manual installation'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_extensions' by focusing on path retrieval rather than enumeration.

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 usage context ('for manual installation'), suggesting this tool is used when a user needs to locate the extension directory for installation purposes. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like 'list_extensions' or provide clear exclusions.

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