chrome_connect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the tool connects to an already-running browser (not launching a new one) and requires remote debugging, which is useful. However, it does not explain failure modes, whether the connection is idempotent, or how success is indicated.

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 concise sentences: the first states the core action and method, the second gives the critical prerequisite. No filler or redundancy.

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?

Given the empty schema, no output schema, and a large set of sibling tools, the description provides the essential prerequisite and connection method, but it does not clarify the tool's place in the workflow or how to verify successful connection. It is minimally adequate but could add more integration context.

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 has zero parameters, so the description does not need to define parameter semantics. Baseline is 4 per the rubric, and there is no gap.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Connect to') and resource ('already-running Chrome browser via DevTools Protocol'). It distinguishes from siblings like chrome_status, chrome_disconnect, and tab operations by focusing on establishing a connection to an existing browser.

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 usage context by mentioning the necessary prerequisite (remote debugging enabled), but it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention that this connection is a prerequisite for other chrome_* tools. Some guidance is present but not comprehensive.

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