get_page_info

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: no DOM traversal or page refetch (lightweight read) and that all_tabs 'never switches tabs' (no side effect). It does not mention permissions or rate limits, but for a simple read-only info tool this is a minor gap.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the return values and scope. Slight redundancy between 'without any DOM traversal or page refetch' and 'lightweight metadata', but overall efficient and well-structured.

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 the simple read-only nature, no output schema, and 100% parameter coverage, the description is complete: it explains the return values, use case, and explains the optional all_tabs behavior. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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%, so the schema fully documents the single all_tabs parameter. The description repeats its behavior ('set all_tabs=true to also list every tab...') with no additional syntax or constraints beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource (current page URL, title, readyState), and immediately distinguishes from siblings by naming navigate() and page_map() as alternatives for different needs. An agent can tell this is the lightweight identity check tool without reading the schema.

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 says when to use it ('ideal for confirming navigation or redirect outcomes between steps') and when to use alternatives ('Use this instead of navigate() or page_map() when you only need to verify the current page identity'). The condition 'only need to verify' implicitly rules out cases requiring deeper inspection.

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