browser_switch_tab

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

No annotations are present. The description implies a simple activation without side effects, but lacks details on behavior such as whether the window comes to focus or if the tab must already be open. This is adequate for a straightforward action but could be more explicit.

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 composed of two short, front-loaded sentences with no wasted words. The action is stated first, followed by essential guidance on obtaining the tab ID.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It could mention that the tab must exist, but the guidance on getting IDs from sibling tools helps imply that. Overall, it covers what an agent needs to know.

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%. The description only repeats the parameter name ('tab ID') without adding new meaning beyond the schema's description ('Tab ID to activate'). Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema already documents the parameter.

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 ('Switch to a specific browser tab by ID') and explicitly names sibling tools (browser_list_tabs, browser_get_new_tab) for obtaining the required ID, differentiating it from related tools.

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 provides clear context on when to use this tool by instructing to get tab IDs from sibling tools, but does not state exclusions or explicitly say when not to use it.

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