browser_disallow_host

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose potential side effects, such as whether removal errors on missing hosts or affects the current page. It only states the core action without edge-case behavior or persistence details.

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?

One clear, single-purpose sentence. No redundant wording, front-loaded action, and fully readable at a glance.

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 single-parameter mutation tool, the description sufficiently conveys the purpose and parameter. However, it omits behavior for invalid hosts or persistence, which would be expected in a more complex tool. Given the low complexity, it is mostly complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds that 'a host' is the parameter to remove, but it lacks format details (e.g., domain vs. URL). It compensates minimally over the schema which only lists 'host' as a string.

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: 'Remove a host from the navigation allowlist.' It uses a specific verb ('Remove') and a specific resource ('navigation allowlist'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like browser_allow_host.

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 implies usage when a host should no longer be navigable, but it does not explicitly state alternatives or exclusion criteria. Sibling tools like browser_allow_host suggest the opposite operation, but no direct comparison is made.

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