merge_firefox_tab_groups

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

With no annotations to rely on, the description discloses key behaviors: it moves all tabs, operates 'in one verified operation' (implying atomicity), and removes the empty source group. It stops short of edge cases like error handling or empty groups, but the most consequential side-effects are clearly stated.

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 that immediately identifies the action and its result. Every word adds value; no redundancy or fluff is present.

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 moderate complexity (3 parameters, no output schema), the description sufficiently explains the operation's outcome and side-effects. It could elaborate on what 'verified' means or how windowId affects behavior, but these are optional enhancements rather than critical gaps.

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 descriptions already cover all three parameters with clear semantics (e.g., case-sensitive exact matching for `to` and `from`, and disambiguation for `windowId`). The description adds no extra parameter-level detail beyond reflecting the operation's intent, so it stays at the baseline 3 for high schema coverage.

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 operation: 'Move every tab of the source group into the target group' and adds a distinctive side-effect ('then remove the now-empty source group'). It differentiates itself from tab-level tools like move_firefox_tab_to_group by the group-level scope and cleanup action.

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 usage is implied by the description's specification of merging and cleaning up, but no explicit alternatives, exclusions, or 'when to use this instead of' hints are given. An agent infers that it's for merging groups, but the description does not guide comparing with move_firefox_tabs_to_group or other siblings.

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