refresh_browser_cookies

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains browser scanning behavior, the 'auto' mode, and the Firefox exception, but does not disclose where cookies are saved, whether existing cookies are overwritten, or any side effects. These gaps are noticeable for a tool that 'saves' cookies.

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 well-structured with a summary, usage condition, and detailed args. It is slightly longer than strictly necessary but every sentence adds value, including the 'Firefox is not Chromium' note. Front-loaded with the main purpose.

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 tool with no required parameters and an output schema, the description covers the use case, prerequisites, parameter options, and return behavior. The 'Returns: Success message or error description' line provides adequate output context.

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 provides only a default value with no description, while the tool description fully documents every browser option: 'auto' scans all Chromium browsers, specific names force a browser, and 'firefox' uses browser_cookie3. This completely compensates for the 0% 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Extract and save session cookies from your web browser.' It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools, which are all MFP data operations, by focusing on browser cookie extraction and session refresh.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'Use this tool when authentication fails and you need to refresh your MyFitnessPal session.' It also provides a prerequisite: 'You must be logged into myfitnesspal.com in the target browser.' This is clear and actionable.

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