Auto-Browser

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden but fails to mention side effects (e.g., whether this triggers JavaScript resize events), timing characteristics (synchronous vs. async), or what happens to existing page content during the resize operation.

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 nine words with no redundancy. The action verb leads the sentence, making it immediately scannable for agents scanning tool lists.

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 three-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description provides the minimum viable context to understand the operation's intent, but lacks necessary operational context (session lifecycle implications, return value expectations) given the absence of annotations.

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 coverage is 0%, requiring the description to compensate fully. While 'specified width and height' references those two parameters, the critical session_id parameter is completely unmentioned in the description, leaving agents to infer its purpose solely from the schema title.

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 ('Resize') with a specific resource ('browser viewport') and clearly distinguishes from siblings like browser.screenshot or browser.activate_tab. It precisely communicates the geometric nature of the operation.

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?

While the 'when to use' is implied (when viewport dimensions need changing), there is no explicit guidance on prerequisites (e.g., session state requirements), no alternatives mentioned, and no exclusions (e.g., minimum recommended sizes for specific sites).

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