get_cookies

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Get cookies') but doesn't describe what the tool returns (e.g., cookie data format), whether it requires authentication, potential rate limits, or side effects. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that interacts with browser state.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence, 'Get cookies from the browser', which is front-loaded and wastes no words. Every part earns its place by stating the core action, though it could benefit from more detail.

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 moderate complexity (2 parameters, browser interaction) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description is minimally complete but lacks context. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects or parameter meanings, making it just adequate but with clear gaps 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It adds no meaning beyond the schema, failing to explain what 'session_id' and 'domain' represent or how they affect cookie retrieval. With 2 parameters and no param info in the description, this is inadequate.

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 'Get cookies from the browser' states a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('cookies'), but it's vague about scope and doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'set_cookie' or 'get_browser_config'. It lacks specificity about what kind of cookies or what browser context.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites like needing an active browser session, nor does it contrast with sibling tools like 'set_cookie' or 'get_browser_status', leaving usage context implied but not explicit.

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