browser_get_local_storage

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get LocalStorage' and does not mention return format, error behavior (e.g., missing key), side effects, or any nuances. This is a significant gap for an agent.

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 extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than genuine conciseness. It provides no useful information beyond the tool name, so it fails to earn its place as a meaningful description.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description still needs to explain basic semantics. 'Get LocalStorage' leaves the agent guessing about the key parameter, return value, and behavior when the key is absent. It is grossly inadequate.

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 input schema has a single 'key' parameter with no description, and the description does not explain what 'key' refers to or how it maps to LocalStorage entries. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description must compensate, but it does not.

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 '获取LocalStorage' directly translates to 'Get LocalStorage', which is essentially a restatement of the tool name. It does not clarify whether it retrieves a specific key or all entries, nor does it differentiate from sibling tools beyond the inherent 'get' semantics.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like browser_set_local_storage or browser_clear_local_storage. The name implies a read operation, but the description provides no context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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