browser_console_messages

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond the basic return action, such as the effect of the 'all' parameter or the filename-save behavior, though these are covered in the 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?

The description is a single sentence with no filler or repetition. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool and front-loads the core function.

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?

The tool has full schema coverage and annotations, but the description omits behavioral nuances like the filename-save option and the meaning of 'all' (unless gleaned from the schema). Given the absence of an output schema, a slightly richer description would improve completeness, but the current state is adequate.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with each parameter having a clear description, so the schema fully documents the parameters. The main description adds no extra parameter semantics, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'Returns' with the clear resource 'all console messages', making the tool's function immediately understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like browser_network_requests or browser_evaluate, which could also return browser data.

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?

No information is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or competing tools, leaving the agent without guidance on tool selection.

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