browser_session_escalate

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing key behavioral traits: it enables side effects, actions will be logged, and it returns a warning message with confirmation. This covers safety, auditability, and response format adequately for a mutation tool.

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 efficiently structured with a purpose statement, warning, parameter explanations, and return information in four concise sentences. Every sentence adds value, and it's appropriately front-loaded with the core functionality and warning.

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 this is a mutation tool with no annotations, 2 parameters, and an output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It explains the tool's purpose, behavioral implications, parameters, and return value. The output schema handles return details, so the description doesn't need to elaborate further.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It documents both parameters (name and reason) with brief explanations, adding meaning beyond the bare schema. However, it doesn't provide format examples or constraints, leaving some ambiguity about parameter expectations.

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 verb ('escalate') and resource ('session'), specifying that it enables action tools like click, type, and execute. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on session escalation rather than direct actions or inspections, though it doesn't explicitly name 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 description provides clear context for when to use this tool: to allow action tools that require escalated permissions. It implies usage before invoking tools like browser_act_click, but doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name specific alternatives among siblings.

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