window

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behaviors. It only lists actions without explaining side effects (e.g., does 'close' close a window or a tab? Does 'switch_latest' focus the most recent window?). The description is too terse to provide transparency.

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 very short (one sentence) and front-loads the purpose. However, it omits critical details, making it under-specified rather than efficiently 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?

Given 4 parameters (1 required), an output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain how parameters relate to actions, valid action values, or expected outputs, insufficient for reliable tool invocation.

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 0%, yet the description adds no meaning for the parameters (action, handle, index, session_id). It only lists actions but does not explain parameter usage. An agent cannot infer valid values or required combinations from this description.

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 tool manages browser windows and tabs and lists the available actions, making the purpose understandable. However, it lacks specificity on what each action does, and does not differentiate from sibling tools (e.g., open_page, navigate_back) which also involve window/tab context.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. For example, when to use this tool's 'switch_latest' versus simply opening a new page. The description does not provide context or examples.

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