cookies

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and discloses nothing: no return shape, no whether cookies are for a specific tab or the whole browser, no auth/same-origin caveats, no indication of read-only behavior. Three words cannot cover a browser-state 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?

It is short, but shortness here is under-specification rather than conciseness — there is no front-loaded statement of what the tool does, so nothing is being trimmed for efficiency.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and no explanation of what the returned cookies look like or what "all" covers, the definition leaves an agent unable to predict the result. It should state that it retrieves cookies for the given/current tab.

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 100% and the single optional `tab` parameter is documented as "tab id, defaults to current". Per the baseline rule for fully-covered schemas, this scores 3 even though the description adds nothing.

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?

"All cookies." restates the tool name without a verb or scope; it does not say whether it returns cookies, sets them, or clears them. A sibling named set_cookie exists, so the read/write distinction was available but left unstated.

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 guidance at all on when to use this versus set_cookie or any other sibling. The agent must infer the read-vs-write split purely from the tool names.

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