dark

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a real behavioral trait — persistence across existing and future pages — which is valuable, but it says nothing about whether the setting survives new sessions, whether it is reversible, or how it interacts with the 'tab' scoping.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with zero filler that communicates the action and its scope immediately.

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?

For a trivial one-optional-param tool with a fully documented schema, this is close to adequate, but it leaves open whether the persistence is per-tab or global and how the tab argument modifies the 'all pages' claim, and no output schema exists to cover the return behavior.

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 100% and the single 'tab' parameter already documents 'tab id, defaults to current'. The description adds no meaning beyond that and actually creates mild ambiguity by claiming the setting applies to all pages while a tab parameter exists.

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 a concrete verb+resource ('Persist dark color-scheme') with a clear scope ('all existing and future pages'). It implicitly differentiates from the sibling 'light' tool via the color scheme named, but never names that sibling 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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this sets dark mode, but there is no statement of when to prefer it over 'light', whether it toggles or is idempotent, or how it relates to the per-tab parameter. No exclusions or alternatives are given.

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