browser_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of indicating side effects. The verb 'get' conveys a read-only operation and 'current' suggests it reflects live state, but the description does not disclose what the returned status looks like, what states are possible, or whether an error occurs if no browser is active.

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 is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to conveying the tool's core purpose, and it is appropriately sized for a parameterless status-check tool.

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 zero-parameter, read-only status tool, this description is mostly complete: an agent knows what to call and roughly what to expect. It does not detail the exact output format, but the simple nature of the operation and lack of output schema make this a minor gap rather than a critical omission.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the input schema is already fully descriptive and there is no parameter information for the description to add. The baseline for no-parameter tools is 4, and nothing here reduces that.

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 a specific verb ('get') and resource ('current connection status of the browser'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like browser_connect and browser_disconnect by being a status read rather than a state-changing action, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 intended use is implied: call this tool when you need to know the browser's current connection status. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this instead of related browser lifecycle tools, nor does it mention prerequisites such as the browser needing to be launched or connected.

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