browse_session_trace

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, openWorld=true, idempotent=false, destructive=false; the description usefully adds that output lands as a .zip under exports/ and enumerates what the trace captures. It omits meaningful behavior: whether stop requires a prior start, what happens on double-start, and where errors surface — relevant given idempotentHint=false.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, with the artifact location trailing. No filler and no repetition of schema content.

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?

With a full output schema, 100% parameter coverage, and safety annotations already present, the description only needs to establish purpose and destination, which it does. The remaining gap is lifecycle behavior (start-before-stop coupling), a minor omission for a 3-parameter 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents action enum semantics, the saveAs pattern/stop requirement, and sessionId provenance. The description adds no parameter detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb pair (start/stop) and resource (Playwright trace) plus the artifact produced (.zip under exports/). It implicitly distinguishes the tool from browse_screenshot and browse_snapshot by naming the trace contents, but never explicitly contrasts with those siblings.

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?

Usage is implied by 'for a session' and the start/stop action pairing, but there is no guidance on when to prefer a trace over browse_console, browse_network_summary, or browse_screenshot, and no stated prerequisites beyond the sessionId schema note.

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