identity_generate

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool generates an identity and returns it as TOML, giving basic transparency, but it does not mention side effects, persistence, randomness, or whether the identity is applied to the current browser session.

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 no filler. It states the verb, resource, and output format economically while remaining readable.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description provides the essential invocation information. It lacks details about what the TOML identity contains or how it relates to the current session, but the tool is simple enough that this is a minor gap.

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 tool takes zero parameters, and the schema fully documents the empty object, so parameter semantics are not a concern. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed; the baseline for a zero-parameter tool is strong.

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?

Description states a specific verb ('Generate') and resource ('new coherent browser identity'), and explicitly notes the output format ('returned as TOML'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling identity_audit, which implies inspection rather than creation.

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 word 'new' implies this tool is for creating an identity rather than auditing an existing one, but the description does not explicitly state when to prefer identity_generate over related tools like session_create or identity_audit. Usage context is only implied, not explained.

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