DrissionPageMCPServer_Modified

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only states the action ('create new tab') without any information about permissions needed, whether it opens in foreground/background, what happens if a URL is invalid, or how it interacts with existing browser sessions. This is inadequate for a tool that likely interacts with browser state.

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 extremely concise with just three Chinese characters. It's front-loaded with the core action and has zero wasted words. While under-specified, it's structurally efficient for what it does convey.

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 likely interacts with browser tabs (inferred from sibling tools), the description is incomplete. With no annotations, 1 undocumented parameter, and an output schema (which might help but isn't described), the description should explain more about the tool's behavior, return values, and context. It fails to provide enough information for safe and effective use.

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 input schema has 1 parameter ('url') with 0% description coverage in the schema. The tool description doesn't mention parameters at all, failing to compensate for the schema gap. For a tool with an undocumented parameter, the description should explain what the 'url' parameter does (e.g., optional URL to load in the new tab) but provides no such information.

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 '创建新标签页' (Create new tab) is a tautology that restates the tool name 'new_tab' in Chinese. It doesn't specify what kind of tab (browser tab, UI tab, etc.) or provide any distinguishing context from sibling tools like 'navigate' or 'connect_browser'. The purpose is stated but lacks specificity and differentiation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no explicit or implied instructions about when to choose 'new_tab' over sibling tools like 'navigate' (which might open URLs in existing tabs) or 'connect_browser' (which might establish browser sessions). No context, exclusions, or prerequisites are mentioned.

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