wrave_get_tab_state

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says 'Read', which implies a non-destructive operation, but it does not explicitly state side effects, error behavior, or permissions. It also does not clarify what happens if the tab_id is invalid or whether the read is synchronous.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the verb 'Read' and lists the specific contents, making it immediately clear what the tool does. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 read tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the main fields returned. However, it lacks guidance on when to use this tool relative to siblings and does not mention the return format or error handling. It is adequate but not fully complete.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning about the tab_id parameter, and the 'active tab' phrasing could conflict with the parameter's purpose. The agent gets no extra guidance beyond the schema.

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 (read) and resource (tab state) and enumerates specific fields (title, URL, viewport dimensions, scroll offset), which distinguishes it from sibling read tools like get_dom_tree or get_accessibility_tree. However, the phrase 'active tab' may mislead since the tool takes a tab_id, implying it can read any tab, not just the active one.

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 when those fields are needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like get_snapshot or get_dom_tree. No exclusions or alternative conditions are mentioned, so the agent must infer the appropriate context from the listed fields.

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