browser_open

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

No annotations exist, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It explains execution timing and timeout handling but does not disclose whether the browser is sandboxed, supports JavaScript, or how multiple calls interact. The return value (durable job_id for continue_background) is mentioned, but other behaviors are omitted.

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 moderately concise (about 70 words) but is poorly structured: it opens with a redundant title phrase, then jumps into timing details. The core purpose is missing, so it requires restatement.

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 lack of annotations and 0% schema description, the description fails to provide a complete picture. It leaves unclear the browser environment, default URL behavior, and relationship to sibling tools. An output schema exists but its contents are not described.

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 0%, so the description should explain all 9 parameters. It only explains on_timeout values and mentions expected_runtime_seconds, timeout_seconds, check_after_seconds, and poll_interval_seconds by name, but does not explain url, width, height, or headless. Four parameters are completely undocumented.

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 opens a browser and navigates to a URL. It starts with 'Kali Agent MCP tool: browser_open' which is essentially the name, then immediately dives into timing parameters. The primary action is implied but not clearly articulated, making it vague.

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 choosing timing parameters and the use of on_timeout values (continue_background, kill, return_partial), but it does not differentiate browser_open from sibling tools like browser_navigate or browser_list. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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