browser_tab_select

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose one important behavioral trait beyond the schema — that the selection is global and affects all browser_* tools — but says nothing about error behavior for an unknown/invalid id, whether the tab must already be shared, or whether the selection persists across sessions.

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?

A single sentence with zero filler, front-loaded with the action and followed by the qualifying scope. Nothing to trim.

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 one-parameter, no-output-schema tool the description covers the essentials (what it does, where the id comes from, what it affects). It stops short on the failure mode for an invalid id and on the prerequisite that a tab must be shared/open, which an agent would want for a state-mutating selection tool with no annotations.

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 coverage is 0% and the single 'id' property has no description, so the description must compensate. It does add real meaning by telling the agent the id comes from browser_tabs, which is the one thing the bare schema cannot convey.

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 gives a specific verb+resource ('make a shared tab the active tab') and states the scope of effect ('for all browser_* tools'). It also points at browser_tabs as the source of the id, but it never explicitly distinguishes itself from the closest siblings browser_tab_new / browser_tab_close / browser_tabs.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: an agent can infer you call this to activate an existing tab before using other browser_* tools, and that the id must come from browser_tabs. There is no explicit when-to-use / when-not guidance or any prerequisite about the tab being shared first.

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