live_new_tab

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing side effects. It clearly states that a new tab is opened, that it becomes the pinned target for subsequent live_* calls, and that it may optionally navigate to a URL. It does not mention potential errors, permissions, or tab lifecycle details, but the core behavioral impact is transparent.

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, direct, and free of unnecessary detail. It front-loads the core action and then provides the optional url behavior, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential context: the action, the target-pinning effect, and the optional navigation parameter. It could mention what the tool returns or what happens if no tab can be opened, but such details are not required for basic usage and the description is sufficient for an agent to proceed.

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 already describes project and session, but the url parameter lacks a schema description. The description adds meaning by explaining that url is optional and used for navigating the new tab, which partially compensates. However, it does not elaborate on url format, default behavior when omitted, or how project/session affect the tab, so the added semantic value is moderate.

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 action: opens a new browser tab and pins it as the target for subsequent live_* calls. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by emphasizing the 'new tab' creation and immediate targeting behavior, and it mentions the optional navigation via url.

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 usage by saying the new tab becomes the target for every other live_* call, and compares it to live_switch_tab. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over live_switch_tab or live_list_tabs, nor does it provide clear when-not-to-use guidance.

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