Get cookie

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's 'Read' is consistent. The description adds no extra behavioral context, such as behavior for non-existent cookies or return format. Since the annotations cover the safety profile, a 3 is appropriate—it's not contradictory but adds minimal value beyond annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the action and the key parameter succinctly, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

For a simple one-parameter read operation with no output schema, the description is adequate. It doesn't specify return value or error behavior, but given the simplicity, this may be acceptable. Mentioning the return value could improve completeness, but it's not a critical gap.

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 100% (the 'name' parameter has 'Cookie name' description). The tool description repeats 'by name', adding no new semantic detail. Baseline 3 is correct when schema already documents the parameter; no additional constraints or format are provided.

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 states a specific verb 'read' on a resource 'cookie' and specifies 'one cookie by name', which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like browser_cookie_list (list all) and browser_cookie_set. However, it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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: use when you need a specific cookie's value by name. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools, leaving the agent to infer from context. Given the large sibling set, explicit routing would be helpful but is absent.

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