Bring tab to front

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 key side effect: it changes what the user sees, and it clarifies that tab visibility is not required for read/operate/capture operations. It omits failure/edge behavior (tab already active, unknown tab or slot), so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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 compact sentences plus a parenthetical; the action is front-loaded and the parenthetical earns its place by preventing an unnecessary tab switch. No filler.

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 no-output, no-annotation tool this covers purpose, user-visible effect, and when to avoid it, with parameters fully handled by the schema. Only minor gaps remain (error/edge cases, whether the previous tab is affected).

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 schema already documents slot (with port math), tab, and agent semantics richly. The description adds no parameter-level information, so the baseline 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?

Specific verb ('brings to the front') and resource ('a tab of its Chrome window'), with an implicit scope that separates it from browser_tabs (listing) and browser_tab_new/close. An agent can identify the operation and its effect on visible state without opening the schema.

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?

Gives an explicit when ('use only when the user wants it') and a when-not ('background tabs can be read, operated and captured; no need to bring them forward to work'), effectively steering the agent away from unnecessary calls. This is exactly the kind of routing guidance the dimension rewards.

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