Seek captured web replay frame

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations: frames are 'retained' and 'redacted', and setting restore=true 'replays its safely restorable actions into the browser and mutate live state'. This directly aligns with destructiveHint=true and clarifies the safety profile of the optional restore 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 entire description is one sentence that front-loads the primary behavior and then adds the conditional restore behavior. There is no wasted wording, and the most important safety-relevant conditional is stated clearly.

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 that an output schema exists and annotations already indicate a destructive, non-idempotent operation, the description is largely complete. It covers the main retrieval behavior, the restore option, and its mutation side effect. Minor gaps remain around when not to use the tool and what 'safely restorable actions' entail.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter documentation. It clearly explains the 'restore' parameter's effect, but sessionId and frameIndex are only understood through their names and schema constraints. This is adequate but not complete compensation for the missing schema descriptions.

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 a specific action ('Return one retained, redacted replay frame') on a specific resource (captured web replay frames). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools, but 'replay frame' is unique enough among the sibling names to convey the core purpose.

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 explains the conditional behavior of 'restore=true' and implies that the tool is for retrieving replay frames. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like web_next_inspect or web_breakpoint_set, nor does it state any exclusions.

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