tab_switch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state what happens with an invalid index, whether the tab must already exist, or any side effects of switching. This is a significant gap for a mutating UI 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?

The description is a single, clearly worded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise, though it could include a bit more context without becoming verbose.

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 simple tool with one well-described parameter and no output schema, the description plus schema is mostly sufficient. However, the description alone does not mention the need to use tab_list to obtain a valid index, which is a relevant contextual gap.

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 100% (the 'index' parameter has a description indicating it is 0-based and from tab_list). The tool description adds nothing beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 'Switch to a chart tab by index' uses a specific verb ('Switch'), identifies the resource ('chart tab'), and specifies the method ('by index'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like tab_new, tab_close, and tab_list.

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 phrase 'by index' implies the agent must have a tab index, likely obtained from tab_list, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention any prerequisites. It offers implied guidance rather than explicit instructions.

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