Set browser launch flags

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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint annotation by disclosing that applying flags restarts Chrome, closes all pages, and drops cookies on ephemeral profiles. Also clarifies the no-argument read-only form and interaction with NODRIVER_ENABLE_* variables, giving a full behavioral picture.

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?

Three short paragraphs, each sentence earns its place. The opening states the primary action, the middle explains the read-only form, and the final covers consequences and overrides. No redundancy or filler.

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 output schema exists, parameter descriptions are extensive, and annotations are present, the description covers all necessary context: runtime effect, read-only usage, restart behavior, cookie implications, and environment variable override. Nothing important is missing.

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 input schema already has 100% coverage with rich per-parameter descriptions (defaults, effects, examples). The tool description itself adds no parameter-specific detail, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate given the schema handles the semantics.

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 changes Chrome's launch flags at runtime and can also show current ones. It specifies the resource (Chrome launch flags) and the verb (change/show), distinguishing it from sibling tools like manage_extensions.

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?

Provides clear context on how to use the tool: call with no arguments to read, with arguments to change; explains restart side effects and override of environment variables. Does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, but the guidance is sufficiently actionable.

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