Browser Extract Forms

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys a read-only listing action, but it does not explain how the tab and session parameters scope the operation, what happens when no forms exist, or whether any page-load condition is required. The main behavior is clear, but scope details are left to inference.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action ('List forms and their fields') and immediately links to the use case. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values are covered. However, the tool has two optional parameters with zero semantic coverage and the description fails to address their meaning or how they affect the set of forms returned. The core purpose is clear, but the scoping parameters make the definition only partially complete.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the description never mentions 'tab' or 'session'. Both parameters are defined only by type and default, so an agent cannot infer what they control or how to target a specific tab or session. The description does nothing to compensate for the schema gap.

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 specific verb ('List') and resource ('forms and their fields'), and immediately frames it as 'the map for browser_fill_form'. This clearly distinguishes the tool from the many extraction siblings (text, html, links, tables) by focusing on forms and tying it to a related action.

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?

The description implies when to use the tool: as a preparatory step for browser_fill_form, since it provides the 'map' of form fields. It names a dependent sibling explicitly, giving an agent context for sequencing, though it does not state exclusions or alternatives beyond that connection.

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