Slot status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. "Shows running Chrome slots" implies a non-mutating read and it discloses the returned fields, but it says nothing about truncation, cost, permissions, or whether output scales with running slots. Adequate but thin for a zero-annotation tool.

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 tight sentences, no filler. The scope statement comes first and the optional-narrowing hint follows, so the agent reads the most important information first.

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 read-only status tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the return shape reasonably well (tabs, opener, last action, summary). What it lacks is any note on cost or output size when many slots are running, and there are no annotations to fall back on.

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% and the slot parameter already documents the 1-30 range and the port-subtraction rule. The description adds only the behavioral effect of passing slot (scope narrows to one slot) and says nothing about the agent parameter, so it matches the baseline.

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 ("Shows") and resource ("running Chrome slots (1-30)") plus the payload returned: tabs, opener, last action, one-line summary. That inventory partially distinguishes it from browser_tabs and slot_inbox, but no sibling is named explicitly, so the agent must infer the split.

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?

"Pass slot for just that slot" gives a narrowing hint for the optional parameter, which is genuinely useful. However, there is no statement of when to prefer this over browser_tabs, slot_inbox, or browser_network, and no exclusions or prerequisites.

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