browser_downloads_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'recent' but does not define the recency window, ordering, whether the list is limited to completed downloads, or what 'state' encompasses. It also doesn't disclose potential side effects (e.g., whether it refreshes the download cache). This is minimal disclosure for a listing operation.

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, concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action and result. However, it is arguably too terse, leaving out essential context, but for conciseness alone it earns a high score.

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 one optional parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should explain the return shape, the meaning of 'state', and the effect of 'limit'. It provides none of these. An agent cannot predict what fields will be in the result or how to interpret the output, making it incomplete for reliable 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?

The only parameter is 'limit' (a number, optional), and the schema has zero description coverage (0%). The description does not mention 'limit' at all, so it provides no semantic guidance on what it controls (e.g., number of entries returned, default value, or maximum). The agent must guess the parameter's meaning.

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 states a clear verb ('List') and resource ('recent downloads') with useful specifics ('on-disk paths and state'). It is distinct from sibling tools like browser_download (which initiates downloads) and browser_save_pdf (which saves PDFs), though it doesn't explicitly name those alternatives.

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 versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, typical scenarios, or exclusions. The agent must infer that this is the listing counterpart to download actions, but nothing in the description tells it when to choose this over other browser tools.

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