browser_status

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

Discloses a non-obvious side effect: it will launch a browser if none is running, which the readOnlyHint alone would not reveal. It also spells out what the report contains. It stops short of saying what happens if the launch fails or how long the start-up can take, keeping it from a 5.

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?

Three sentences, each with a distinct job: what it returns, the launch side effect plus when to call it, and the sibling alternatives. Front-loaded with the core purpose and free of filler.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the return-value burden and does so fully, enumerating every reported field including protocol type and tab marking. Annotations cover the open-world/read-only framing, and the auto-launch caveat closes the last 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?

The tool takes no parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to add and the baseline of 4 applies. Nothing in the description misdescribes the empty input object.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('health check: report which browser is connected') and enumerates the returned fields (name, protocol, endpoint, PID, headless, profile dir, open tabs with current marked). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings tabs_list and browsers_installed, so an agent can route correctly without opening a schema.

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?

Gives a positive usage rule ('a good first call in a session') and names two alternatives with the exact condition that selects each ('Use tabs_list when you only need the tabs, browsers_installed to see what could be launched'). No inference required.

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