browser_tabs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It implies a read-only listing, but does not say whether listing activates/selects tabs, whether results are paginated or capped, or what identifiers the returned tabs carry for follow-up calls like browser_tab_select.

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 short sentences with the core behavior front-loaded and the parameter variant second; no wasted words.

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 one-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description is only partially complete: it never indicates what a tab entry contains (ids, titles, group names) that an agent needs to chain into browser_tab_select or browser_tab_close.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the single parameter, and it does: groupOnly=true restricts results to the active task group. The boolean's false/default behavior is only implied, so it falls short of a 5.

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 ("List open tabs") and adds scope detail about tab groups. It doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling browser_groups or browser_status, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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 groupOnly=true variant implies a use case (focusing on the active task group), but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over browser_groups or browser_status, nor any exclusions.

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