get_console_messages

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It transparently states that clear=true clears the full buffer after reading, and that filter='user' excludes extension service-worker/content-script logs. This goes beyond the schema and reveals meaningful side effects and filtering behavior.

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 two sentences and free of fluff. It front-loads the core purpose and then packs high-value parameter guidance into the remaining sentence. Every clause contributes useful information.

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?

The description covers the core behavior and the two most behaviorally significant parameters, and an output schema exists, so return values need not be detailed. Still, for a six-parameter tool with no annotations, key execution details like session_id, offset, max_items, and timeout are not explained, leaving an agent to guess how pagination or multi-tab selection works.

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 description adds real meaning to clear and filter, which is valuable given the schema provides no descriptions. However, offset, timeout, max_items, and session_id are left entirely unexplained, and with 0% schema description coverage these parameters remain ambiguous. The description compensates for only a subset of the parameters.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Read a page of captured console messages and exceptions from a real-browser tab.' It clearly identifies the tool as a read/retrieval operation and distinguishes it from sibling capture controls like console_capture_start and console_capture_stop.

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 gives explicit context for when to use the tool: it reads previously captured console messages. It also provides actionable guidance for the clear and filter options, explaining exactly what each does. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use it, but the 'captured' wording implies it is intended after capture has been started.

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