page_interrupt

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It clearly discloses the side effect profile: 'The page keeps its DOM and state; only the in-flight script is killed.' It also explains why the main thread cannot process navigation, adding important behavioral context beyond the basic 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?

Three well-organized sentences: action first, trigger second, consequence and why nothing else works third. Every sentence earns its place, with no repetition or fluff.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description fully equips an agent: it states what the tool does, when to invoke it, what happens to the page, and why alternatives won't work. 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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so no parameter semantics need to be explained. The empty schema covers everything; a baseline of 4 is appropriate because there is nothing parameter-related for the description to add.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Abort the JavaScript the page is currently running.' It also explicitly distinguishes itself from page_navigate and page_reload by explaining that they do not free a blocked thread, making the tool's unique role clear.

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?

It gives an explicit trigger condition: 'Use it when a tool reports PAGE_UNRESPONSIVE.' It also names alternatives that should not be chosen (reloading, navigating) and explains why they fail, leaving no ambiguity about when to use this tool.

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