Tap

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, covering safety profiles. The description adds the 'current site' scoping constraint, which is useful context not present in annotations. However, it omits details about return format, privacy implications, or whether it includes httpOnly/secure cookies.

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, efficient sentence of six words. It is front-loaded with the action ('Get') and contains zero redundant or filler content. Every word earns its place.

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 tool's simplicity (zero parameters, clear concept) and the presence of annotations covering safety traits, the description is sufficiently complete. While it lacks return value details (no output schema exists), the action is intuitive enough that 'Get cookies' adequately conveys the tool's function.

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 contains zero parameters. Per the evaluation rules, zero parameters warrants a baseline score of 4, as there are no parameter semantics to describe beyond what the empty schema already communicates.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') with a clear resource ('cookies') and scope ('current site'). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like tap_click, tap_type, or tap_screenshot by specifying data retrieval rather than interaction or capture.

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 states what the tool does but provides no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., when to prefer this over inspect_networkDump for cookie data) or prerequisites (e.g., requiring navigation to a site first).

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