tap_runtime

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

Adds significant context beyond annotations: explains that headless has no login, chrome provides real browser sessions, and the effect of switching mid-session. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Concise at ~60 words, front-loaded with main purpose. Every sentence adds value, including the clarifying note about tap mcp connect.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, usage, and behavioral implications. No missing context.

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 schema already describes the parameter with enum and description. The description adds practical context (login sessions, speed, write operations) that complements the schema, going beyond baseline 3.

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 tool switches browser runtime mid-session, specifying the default headless mode and when to use chrome (for real browser with login sessions or write operations). It is distinct from all sibling tools, which are unrelated to runtime switching.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use chrome vs headless, including specific use cases (Xiaohongshu, Zhihu, write operations) and how to switch back. Also clarifies it is unrelated to 'tap mcp connect', avoiding confusion.

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