List bookmarks

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

With readOnlyHint=true already covering the safety profile, the description adds useful context: it reads from a privileged context, defaults to the toolbar, and exposes the guid needed by browser_remove_bookmark. It does not explain the full return shape or any pagination behavior, but it goes beyond the annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded: it states the action, the default folder behavior, and the key output field. There is no redundant or filler text.

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 simple one-parameter read tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essentials: folder targeting, default behavior, and the important guid field. It could say more about what other bookmark fields are returned, which is the only notable gap.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the parentGuid parameter and its special values are already documented in the schema. The description repeats the same defaults and folder-guid guidance without adding syntax or format details beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource: read bookmarks from a folder. It also distinguishes the tool's output from related operations by noting each entry carries the guid that browser_remove_bookmark needs, so an agent can identify this as the listing step in a bookmark workflow.

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?

It explains the default folder and how to reach the bookmarks menu and Other Bookmarks via parentGuid, which gives clear usage context. It does not explicitly compare against sibling tools like browser_bookmark_folder or browser_bookmark_manage, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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