browser_switch_tab

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It explicitly states that the Chrome tab is not changed, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention error handling or side effects for invalid tab_id.

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 two sentences plus an Args section, with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and efficiently provides parameter guidance.

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 simplicity (1 param), no annotations, and an output schema, the description covers the main behavior and parameter origin. It could mention failure modes or constraints, but overall it is complete enough.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must add meaning. It explains that tab_id comes from browser_get_tabs, which adds context beyond the schema. Could be more specific about format but is sufficient.

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 it switches the active MCP browser tab without changing the visible Chrome tab. This is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes from sibling tools like browser_focus_tab.

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 tells where to get tab_id (from browser_get_tabs) but does not explicitly guide when to use or avoid this tool compared to alternatives like browser_focus_tab. Usage context is implied but not clearly stated.

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