browser_launch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only lists high-level features (device simulation, video recording, tracking) without explaining side effects, return values, browser instance lifecycle, or prerequisites. '启动' implies action but gives no insight into what actually happens or what the agent should expect.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core action. Every word earns its place, and it avoids redundancy with the schema.

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?

This is a complex tool with 7 optional parameters, a nested viewport object, and no output schema or annotations. A launch operation should clarify return values, whether a browser context is created, and how it relates to subsequent sibling tools. The terse description leaves too much unstated for an agent to safely and correctly invoke it.

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 57%, leaving headless, viewport, and browserType undocumented. The description mentions device simulation, video recording, and tracking, which map to deviceName, recordVideo, and recordTrace, but these already have schema descriptions. It adds no meaning for the undocumented parameters and does not compensate for the coverage gap with any new info.

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 action and resource: '启动浏览器' (launch browser). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by highlighting unique launch-time capabilities like device simulation, video recording, and tracking, making it unmistakable from operations on existing browser contexts.

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 that this is the entry point for browser interaction, but it does not explicitly state when to use it, whether it should be called before other browser_* tools, or mention any alternatives. The sibling list makes it obvious enough, but explicit guidance is missing.

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