Pagebolt

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well by disclosing key behaviors: it lists active sessions only, returns specific data (session IDs, creation times, expiry times), and implies it's a read-only operation (no destructive hints). It could improve by mentioning rate limits or authentication needs, but it covers essential traits adequately.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by a concise usage guideline. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy, making it efficiently structured and appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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's low complexity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is nearly complete: it explains what the tool does, what it returns, and when to use it. It could slightly improve by detailing the output format more explicitly, but it's sufficient for effective use.

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 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information, which is fine here as there are no parameters to document, and it appropriately focuses on the tool's purpose and output.

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 specific action ('List all active persistent browser sessions') and resource ('for your API key'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'list_devices' or 'create_session'. It provides exact scope and purpose without being vague or tautological.

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 states when to use this tool ('Useful for checking which sessions are still alive before reusing them'), providing clear context. However, it does not specify when not to use it or name alternatives among siblings, such as 'destroy_session' for cleanup, which prevents a perfect score.

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