browser_get_request_details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It adds the 'bounded textual response body' qualifier, but does not clarify the read-only nature, error handling, session requirements, or define what 'bounded' means. Minimal disclosure for a tool with no annotation support.

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 is front-loaded with the core action and adds a relevant qualifier. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or digression.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should explain what 'inspect one request' returns. It doesn't specify the fields (URL, status, headers, etc.) or the nature of the bounded body. Among many sibling inspection tools, it lacks contextual completeness for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 only 33% (only sessionId has a description). The tool description does not elaborate on requestId or includeResponseBody; it vaguely references response body but doesn't explain the parameter or default behavior, leaving key parameters undocumented.

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 inspects a single request and includes a bounded textual response body when available. The phrase 'one request' distinguishes it from sibling list tools like browser_get_network_requests and browser_get_failed_requests, though it doesn't name them explicitly.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It implies usage for inspecting a specific request, but doesn't mention alternative tools for listing requests or handling failures, nor does it provide any exclusions or context.

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