List Chrome profiles

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden. The verb 'list' strongly implies a read-only operation without mutation, and the details about output (name, directory, last active) set expectations. It doesn't explicitly state that no profiles are modified, but the non-destructive nature is clearly implied. It could mention that it requires no special permissions, but this is minor for a local enumeration 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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the primary action ('List Chrome browser profiles') and includes necessary output details without any filler. Every word adds value, making it well-structured and concise.

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, zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description is complete. It tells the agent exactly what the tool returns (name, directory, last active) and implies the result is a list. There is no missing information that an agent would need to invoke it correctly.

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 input schema has zero parameters, and the description correctly implies that no input is needed. Since there are no parameters to document, the description does not need to add parameter-level meaning, and the baseline of 4 for zero-parameter tools applies.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'Chrome browser profiles configured on this machine', and specifies the output fields (name + directory, last active). This unambiguously differentiates it from the sibling list_chrome_tabs, since it targets profiles rather than tabs.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like open_chrome_profile or list_chrome_tabs. It does not state any exclusions, prerequisites, or scenarios where another tool would be more appropriate. The usage context is left entirely to the agent's inference.

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