ghost_browser_tabs

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral burden. 'List' clearly signals a read-only operation, and 'open tabs' plus the output fields define what the agent can expect. It does not discuss optional-id behavior or assumptions like an active browser, but for a simple listing tool the core behavior is transparent enough.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every part adds information about what the tool lists and what it returns.

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 the no-argument call, the description is sufficient: list all open tabs and return their ids, titles, and URLs. However, because there is no output schema, no annotations, and the optional `id` parameter is completely undocumented, the description is not fully complete for an agent that needs to understand all invocation variants.

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 schema provides only a string `id` with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The tool description never explains what `id` means or how it affects the listing, so the agent cannot determine whether passing `id` filters, selects, or targets a specific tab. The phrase 'target ids' refers to output fields, not the parameter.

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 the specific verb 'List' against the resource 'open tabs' and enumerates the returned fields: target ids, titles, and URLs. This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinguishes it from single-tab action tools like ghost_tab_find, ghost_tab_describe, and ghost_tab_close.

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 clearly indicates this is the tool to call when the agent needs to enumerate open tabs. It provides enough context for the primary use case, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives such as ghost_tab_find.

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