safari_start_console

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full behavioral transparency burden. It only states that it starts capturing, without disclosing side effects (e.g., clearing previous messages), error conditions, or lifecycle behavior (e.g., how to stop capturing).

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 is front-loaded with the core action and includes a key usage hint. Every word earns its place.

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 simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description provides the essential purpose and a usage guideline. However, it lacks context on how this tool relates to sibling tools like safari_get_console and safari_clear_console, and does not address what happens on multiple calls.

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 tool has no parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty). The description adds value by explaining what types of messages are captured, which is sufficient for a parameterless tool.

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 tool's action: start capturing console messages, and specifies the types (log, warn, error, info). The phrase 'Call once per page' adds a clear usage scope, distinguishing it from sibling tools like safari_get_console that retrieve messages.

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 explicitly advises to call once per page, providing a clear usage context. However, it does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, which would be helpful given the presence of related siblings.

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