create_browser_live_view

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses a key constraint ('Rejected while a CDP client is connected') and that the URL allows watch and control, but omits permissions, side effects, whether it creates a persistent resource, or URL lifetime. For a tool whose name suggests creation, this leaves important behavioral gaps.

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, no waste, front-loaded with the core purpose followed by a critical rejection condition. Every sentence earns its place and the structure makes the key limitation immediately visible.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the purpose and a crucial operational constraint. It could mention URL lifetime or permission requirements, but it is largely complete given the tool's simplicity and the absence of an output schema to explain return values.

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% and the single parameter (sessionId) is fully documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax, format, or selection guidance beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does all parameter documentation.

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 states a specific verb (Get) and resource (URL a human can open to watch and control a running Cloud Browser session). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like list_browser_sessions, get_browser_session, stop_browser_session, and create_browser_session, though it does not explicitly name any alternative. The scope is precise and front-loaded.

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 implies when to use it (when a human needs to watch and control a running session) and provides a when-not condition ('Rejected while a CDP client is connected'). However, it does not name alternatives or explain when to prefer this over get_browser_session or other session tools. Implied usage with one exclusion, but no explicit routing.

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