browser_html

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It covers execution timing and on_timeout behavior, but it omits core functionality (e.g., that it returns HTML), whether it modifies session state, and any side effects. The description is insufficient for safe agent decision-making.

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 extremely short (45 words) but wastes space on a header 'Kali Agent MCP tool: browser_html' and jumps into execution timing without first stating the tool's purpose. It lacks logical structure and front-loading of the primary action.

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 8 parameters and an output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool does, how it interacts with the browser session, or what the output contains. The agent has insufficient information to use the tool correctly, especially with many sibling tools that handle different browser interactions.

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 0%, meaning no parameters are explained in the schema. The description only mentions some timing parameters by name but does not define their meaning, units, or acceptable values. For example, 'max_chars' appears in the schema but is not addressed. This leaves the agent without essential parameter information.

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 does not explicitly state that the tool retrieves HTML content from a browser session. It mentions 'Kali Agent MCP tool: browser_html' but lacks a clear verb+resource statement. Sibling tools like browser_text and browser_screenshot suggest alternative actions, but the description does not distinguish between them.

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 provides guidance on setting timing parameters and choosing on_timeout values, but it does not explain when to use this tool versus other browser tools (e.g., browser_text, browser_network). There is no mention of use cases or exclusions, so the agent has no guidance on tool selection.

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