webdev_user_agent

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as error handling, input validation, rate limits, or idempotency. It only describes the intended function without any behavioral caveats.

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?

The description comprises two sentences, but the first sentence 'Menu ID: user_agent.' is irrelevant metadata that does not aid an AI agent. The second sentence is concise and clear. Reducing or removing the first sentence would improve conciseness.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description should provide more complete context about the output format, possible errors, or usage notes. It only covers the basic purpose, leaving important details for the agent to infer or look up via describe_tool.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage for its single parameter. The description does not add meaning beyond the parameter name 'userAgent,' nor does it provide format, examples, or constraints. The description simply restates that it parses user agent strings, which is already implied by the tool name.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Parse and analyze browser user agent strings. Extract browser name, version, operating system, device type, and platform information.' It uses specific verbs and identifies the resource and outputs. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from its siblings, though its unique function among webdev tools is implicit.

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 description fails to provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'Use describe_tool with tool_id "user_agent" for full page guidance,' which defers guidance but does not itself explain appropriate usage contexts or exclusion criteria.

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