Get Page Info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds useful context by listing the exact returned fields and describing the tool as 'cheap orientation,' which helps set expectations without an output schema.

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, zero waste, and the most important information (what fields are returned) is front-loaded. The second sentence adds usage value without being verbose.

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 read-only tool with full parameter coverage and rich annotations, the description is nearly complete: it names the return fields and gives a usage cue. It could better distinguish itself from sibling tools such as get_current_tab or get_page_content, but nothing essential is missing.

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%, and tab_id is thoroughly documented in the schema itself, including fallback behavior and the requirement to call open_url first when changing tabs. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a clear verb+resource: it returns a page overview with specific fields (title, url, ready state, meta description, headings, form/frame counts). It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like get_current_tab, get_page_content, or get_html, so it falls short of a 5.

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 phrase 'Cheap orientation before deciding what to do' implies when to use the tool, but it gives no explicit alternatives, exclusions, or when-not conditions. Usage is inferable but not spelled out.

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