browser_video_save

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the prerequisite (session started with recordVideo), the lifecycle timing (.webm finalizes when page/browser closes), and the fallback return behavior when path is omitted. This is substantial transparency, though it does not describe what happens if the prerequisite is unmet or what is returned when a path is provided.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The core action, prerequisite, lifecycle detail, and fallback behavior are all present in a compact, front-loaded structure.

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 single-optional-parameter tool, the description covers the key context: prerequisite, effect, timing, and fallback. It does not specify the return value when a path is provided and there is no output schema, but the description is still largely complete for practical invocation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the path parameter and its omitted behavior. The description adds little beyond reinforcing that the path is the output destination; it does not add new format, default, or conflict semantics.

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?

States a specific verb ('Direct') and resource ('the active page's session recording'), plus the target format (.webm). The reference to recordVideo and .webm clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like browser_save_pdf and browser_save_blob.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use the tool: only after a session has been started with recordVideo. It also describes the no-path fallback behavior, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use cases.

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