socials_get_active_tab

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It states that the tool gets the focused tab, but it does not disclose what information is returned (e.g., title, URL, tab ID) or any potential side effects. It is not misleading, but lacks depth beyond the core action.

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 the main purpose and followed by a clear alternative reference. Every word contributes value, with no fluff or redundancy.

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 has no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential context for selection and invocation: what it operates on and how it differs from a sibling. It stops short of describing the return value, which would be helpful but not critical for such a simple getter.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so there is no parameter meaning to add. The baseline for zero-param tools is 4, and the description does not need to clarify any parameter semantics as none exist.

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 specifies the verb 'Get' and the resource 'currently focused browser tab', with an explanatory parenthetical 'what you are looking at'. It further distinguishes itself from the sibling tool by naming socials_get_agent_tab, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly provides usage context: use this tool for the currently focused tab, and for the tab Claude automates, use socials_get_agent_tab. This is direct guidance on when to use this tool versus an alternative, meeting the highest bar.

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