Open browser

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

Annotations already declare openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds behavioral details beyond that: it waits until ready, returns specific endpoint formats, and notes the possibility of a long first launch due to kernel download. This goes beyond the structured data.

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 three sentences long, front-loads the core action, and each sentence contributes essential information: the action, the return endpoints, and timing behavior. There is no redundant or wasteful text.

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?

The tool has no output schema, but the description explicitly details the return values (ws.puppeteer, ws.selenium, debug_port) and the wait behavior. It gives an agent everything needed to invoke the tool and understand what to expect, especially given the single parameter and available annotations.

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 already provides a full description for the single parameter (profile_uuid: 'Profile UUID to open'), giving 100% schema coverage. The tool description does not add further parameter-specific semantics, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 begins with 'Launch the browser for a profile and wait until it is ready,' a specific verb+resource statement that clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like close_browser or list_running_browsers. The mention of returned automation endpoints further nails down the tool's role.

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 provides clear context about when the tool is used (to launch a browser and get automation endpoints) and includes practical timing information (first launch may take minutes). It does not, however, explicitly state alternatives or exclusions, so it misses the top bar for explicit when/when-not guidance.

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