get_local_storage

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. 'Get' signals a read-only operation and 'current domain' scopes the data, but it does not mention return shape, empty storage behavior, or how tabId affects the results. This is decent but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence that states action and scope without filler. It is appropriately concise for a low-complexity tool.

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 low-complexity tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers what the tool does and where it operates (current domain). It does not detail error conditions or return format, but these are not critical for a simple getter.

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 covers 100% of the parameter (tabId) with its own description and marks it optional. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but the baseline of 3 applies given full schema coverage and a single optional parameter.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Get all localStorage key-value pairs,' clearly identifying a read operation. The 'current domain' scope and sibling names like set_local_storage and clear_local_storage distinguish this as the retrieval tool.

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 clearly implies use when you need to read localStorage values for the current domain. It does not explicitly contrast with set_local_storage/clear_local_storage, but the context is unambiguous enough for a simple tool.

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