browser_recover

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool force-drops the connection, resets server state, and reports profile-lock diagnostics. It does not fully spell out side effects such as whether all browser state/session is lost, but it is honest about the reset nature.

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?

Two sentences deliver the trigger condition, the action taken, the expected outcome, and a common underlying cause. The most important information is front-loaded, and there is no filler or repetition.

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 zero-parameter escape-hatch tool with no output schema, the description covers when to use it, what it does, and what to expect afterward. It is slightly vague about what 'resets server state' entails in terms of data loss and does not differentiate from the sibling reset_profile tool, but it is otherwise sufficient.

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 tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so there is no parameter semantics to convey. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately spends no space on parameter details.

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 names a specific recovery operation ('force-drops the connection and resets server state') tied to a clear precondition: the browser is wedged and browser_close cannot complete. It also distinguishes itself from browser_launch and browser_close by explaining how it enables relaunching.

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?

It explicitly states when to use the tool: as an escape hatch when browser_close fails and the browser is wedged, with the goal of making browser_launch work again. It does not explicitly contrast with related tools like reset_profile, so it stops short of full alternative guidance.

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