emulate_geolocation

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Fake', without addressing whether the override persists, how to revert it, or any side effects on the current page or session. This is insufficient for a state-changing 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?

A single, compact sentence: 'Fake the browser's geolocation to any coordinates'. Every word serves a purpose, with no filler or repetition.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should at least mention resetting behavior or the need to clear the override (e.g., via emulate_clear_all). The current description is too thin for an agent to confidently use it in a real session without additional 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, meaning latitude, longitude, and accuracy are already well-documented. The description adds no meaningful parameter details; 'any coordinates' merely echoes the schema's latitude/longitude ranges. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries the load.

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 action ('Fake'), the resource ('browser's geolocation'), and the target ('any coordinates'). It is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like emulate_timezone or emulate_user_agent, which reference different browser features.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool, prerequisites, or how it interacts with sibling tools such as emulate_clear_all. The description simply states what it does, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name.

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