browser_mock_url

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

No annotations, so description carries full burden. Adds lifecycle info ('Cleared by browser_unblock_urls') and behavioral hint ('fault injection'). Could mention side effects on other requests but sufficient for basic understanding.

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, each serving a distinct purpose: definition and clearing behavior. No redundant or unclear phrasing. Front-loaded with key information.

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?

Covers core behavioral aspects (mocking, clearing) but omits parameter details and output format. With 5 parameters and no annotations, more description would help. Output schema exists, reducing need for return info.

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 has 0% description coverage. Description only mentions 'glob pattern' indirectly through 'pattern' parameter. Other parameters (status, body, content_type, session_id) are not explained, leaving them underspecified.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'fulfill requests' with resource 'matching a glob pattern' and purpose 'response mocking / fault injection'. It also distinguishes from sibling 'browser_unblock_urls' and implies contrast with 'browser_block_urls'.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use. Only implied that it is for mocking/fault injection and cleared by unblock_urls. Lacks prerequisites or alternatives, but purpose is clear enough for basic selection.

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