CDP MCP

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool connects to an instance but doesn't describe what happens after connection (e.g., establishes a session, enables control), potential errors (e.g., if CDP isn't enabled), or side effects. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. Every part of the sentence contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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 moderate complexity (connecting to a browser instance), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but lacks details on behavioral outcomes, error conditions, and what the connection enables. It should provide more context about the tool's role in the CDP workflow.

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%, with clear documentation of port, host, and tab parameters including defaults. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 ('Connect') and target resource ('an already-running Chrome/Chromium instance with CDP enabled'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like cdp_launch (which likely starts a new instance) and other CDP tools that perform different operations on connected instances.

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 by specifying 'already-running Chrome/Chromium instance with CDP enabled,' indicating this tool is for connecting to pre-existing instances rather than launching new ones. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name specific alternatives among the many sibling tools.

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