scout_cookies

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It merely states 'View cookies,' implying a read operation, but does not confirm that it is non-destructive, what permissions are needed, or whether it modifies browser state. No side effects or limitations are mentioned.

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 wasted words. It efficiently conveys the basic purpose. However, it could include more detail without being verbose, such as parameter effects or usage context.

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 the tool has three parameters and an output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain the output schema nature, parameter interactions, or typical use scenarios. Even though output schema exists, the description should provide more context to help the agent select and invoke the tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for parameters. Each parameter (tab, all_info, all_domains) is documented in the schema, and the description does not enhance their semantics.

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 'View' and the resource 'cookies' with a scope of 'the current page.' This purpose is distinct from sibling tools like scout_act or scout_fetch. However, the parameters allow viewing cookies from other domains and including additional info, which is not reflected in the description, making it slightly narrow.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as other scout tools. There are no prerequisites, conditions, or examples of appropriate use cases. The agent must infer usage solely from the tool name and sibling list.

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