browser_tabs

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 add two genuinely useful behavioral facts: tab titles/URLs are untrusted page content (a prompt-injection warning) and agent tabs are isolated in their own Safari window. However, it does not disclose that close is an irreversible mutation, whether closing affects all windows, or what list returns.

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, front-loaded with the action set, followed by the highest-risk context (untrusted content) and the isolation note. 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 five-parameter multi-action tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose and safety but leaves action-specific behavior (especially close semantics and what list returns) unstated. Adequate to call correctly in the common case, incomplete for the destructive and listing paths.

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 only 40%: `tabId` and `backend` are described in the schema, but `all` and `url` are bare types with no explanation anywhere. The description does not compensate—it never mentions what `all` scopes or when `url` applies (presumably only for new), and only indirectly hints at the real/driver backend split via the 'own Safari window' remark.

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?

Names four specific verbs (list, open, select, close) against a clear resource (tabs), so the agent knows this is tab management rather than page interaction. It implicitly separates itself from siblings like browser_navigate or browser_snapshot, though it never names an alternative 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?

The action verbs mirror the enum, so the intended use of each action is inferable, but there is no explicit guidance on when to open a new tab versus navigating the current one, or how `all` changes the scope of list/close. No when-not-to-use or prerequisite is stated.

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