learn_broker_navigation

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

The description states it opens a browser and records specific data, but with no annotations, it fails to disclose side effects, whether the operation is read-only, whether it requires user interaction, or what happens after recording. The behavioral burden falls entirely on the description, and it is insufficient.

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, well-structured sentence that conveys the core action and targets. It is concise and front-loaded, with no wasted words.

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 there is no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns, how the recorded data is stored or used, or how the optional 'url' parameter interacts with the default dashboard behavior. The tool's complexity warrants more context.

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 only 50%, and the description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides. The schema documents 'broker' via an enum and 'url' as a starting URL, but the description does not clarify how these parameters affect the recording behavior.

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 records navigation patterns, XHR requests, and DOM snapshots for a broker. The verb 'record' and the specific artifacts make the purpose clear, but it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like broker_connect or broker_status.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as broker_connect or get_holdings. There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use it, or how it fits into the broader workflow.

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