browser_launch

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that DevTools events are collected, but does not disclose other significant behaviors such as whether the provided URL is navigated to, whether the browser blocks on load, whether a headless instance is launched by default, or what return value is provided. This is a significant gap for a launch operation.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the primary action. It avoids filler and is easy to scan. However, it is so minimal that it borders on under-specification, but for conciseness alone it is effective.

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's role as an initial setup step in a browser automation suite, the description is incomplete. It does not explain how this tool relates to sibling tools, what 'collecting DevTools events' entails, or how to use the returned data. No output schema or annotations exist, so the description should have provided more context but does not.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the lack of parameter documentation, but it does not mention any of the four parameters (url, headless, viewportWidth, viewportHeight). The schema provides only types and defaults, with no semantic meaning, and the description adds nothing to clarify what these parameters control.

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 identifies the action ('Launch') and the resource ('a new Chromium instance'), and adds a second purpose ('start collecting DevTools events'). This distinguishes it from siblings like browser_connect (which implies connecting to an existing instance) and browser_navigate (which implies an existing browser).

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like browser_connect, nor does it state any prerequisites (e.g., 'use this before other browser tools'). The implied usage is not explicit, so it falls short of even the 'implied usage' level.

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