browser_ask_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions the dialog can include fields and returns responses, but lacks details on blocking behavior, cancellation handling, timeout consequences, or what happens if the user dismisses the dialog.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and every word adds meaning. No redundant or vague phrasing.

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?

No output schema exists; the description only says 'Returns user responses' without detailing the response format or how to interpret cancellation/dismissal. This is insufficient for a tool expecting user interaction.

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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. The description adds value by grouping use cases and explaining that omitting fields yields a simple confirmation, which clarifies parameter usage 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 it shows an overlay dialog for user interaction, lists specific use cases (credentials, 2FA, CAPTCHA, OAuth), and notes it returns responses. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like browser_solve_captcha or browser_handle_dialog.

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 user input is needed but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives or provide when-not-to guidance. The context of sibling tools suggests scenarios, but no direct exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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