list_tabs

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 the scope ('current browser') and the behavioral filter ('only page type'), which fully describes the tool's behavior for a non-destructive list operation. There is no hidden side effect or additional trait that needs disclosure.

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, front-loaded sentence that includes the action, scope, and filter. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or filler, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, no complex side effects), the description is sufficiently complete. It defines the exact scope (current browser, page-type tabs) and the action (list), which fully prepares an agent to invoke the tool correctly. No additional context is needed.

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, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty object). The baseline for 0-param tools is 4, and the description correctly adds no unnecessary parameter information while still conveying the tool's purpose and constraints.

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 verb 'list' and the resource 'debuggable Tabs in current browser', and includes a specific filter ('only page type'). This distinguishes it from sibling DOM inspection tools, which focus on page elements rather than tabs.

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 for when to use the tool (enumerate browser tabs) and notes the page-type filter. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the tool's unique role among siblings makes the usage obvious. This aligns with 'clear context, no exclusions'.

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