Reload

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the most important behavioral trait: unsaved user input on the page is lost. It also explains the cache-bypass effect of ignore_cache. It omits any auth/permission context or return behavior, but the core destructive consequence is clearly flagged.

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 short sentences, zero waste, with the primary purpose front-loaded and the warning properly positioned last where it is most likely to be read before acting.

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 page-reload tool with one required parameter, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description covers purpose, the key behavior, and the main side effect. It is essentially complete, with only minor gaps around multi-tab/slot 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all seven parameters, including ignore_cache's own description. The description adds little beyond restating that ignore_cache bypasses the cache, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Reloads the page') and clarifies the semantics with the analogy '(same as Chrome reload)'. It is clearly distinguishable from browser_navigate, browser_back and browser_forward, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by the reload semantics and the ignore_cache note, giving the agent a sense of when to reach for a hard reload. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to reload rather than re-navigate, and no mention of prerequisites or tab/slot requirements for calling it.

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