Launch Sailfish Browser

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false. Description adds context: it stops stale state (potentially destructive side effect) and reports PID details. It hints at display/session env requirements. However, it doesn't clarify auth needs, rate limits, or what 'stale state' means concretely. With annotations carrying the safety profile, this adds moderate useful context.

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?

Single efficient sentence, front-loaded with the main actions. No wasted words, though it crams three distinct operations into one line.

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?

No output schema, so description needn't cover return values, but it doesn't mention the PID report format. For a 5-param tool with 40% schema coverage and mutation behavior, more detail on side effects and parameters would help. Adequate but gaps remain.

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 coverage is 40%, so description must compensate. It mentions 'display/session env' and 'topmost PID details' but does not explain url, device, timeout, stop_stale, or wait_seconds semantics. The schema partially documents device and timeout; stop_stale and wait_seconds are undocumented. Marginal value added.

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?

States specific actions: stopping stale browser state, launching Sailfish Browser with display/session env, reporting topmost PID. This distinguishes it from generic siblings like sailfish_device_app_launch or sailfish_device_topmost_pid, though sibling differentiation is only implied, not named.

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 vs. sailfish_device_app_launch, sailfish_device_command_start, or sailfish_device_topmost_pid. Usage is only implied by the action description.

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