block_urls

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It clearly states that blocks apply to subsequent requests, uses Chrome wildcard syntax, and removal mechanism. It doesn't disclose side effects or permissions, but is fairly transparent about core behavior.

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?

Two sentences with integrated examples, front-loaded purpose, no wasted words. Structured efficiently.

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 simple single-parameter tool and existence of an output schema (not shown), the description sufficiently covers usage and behavioral context. Minor gap: doesn't mention effect on other tools, but not essential for basic understanding.

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 description must explain parameters. It thoroughly describes 'patterns' as an array of strings using Chrome wildcard syntax with concrete examples, adding significant meaning beyond the minimal schema.

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 it blocks subsequent requests matching URL patterns. It specifies the resource (requests) and action (block), and distinguishes from sibling 'unblock_all_urls' by mentioning how to remove blocks.

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 explains when to use (to block matching URLs) and how to remove blocks via empty list or unblock_all_urls. It doesn't explicitly mention when not to use or contrast with other blocking tools like fail_requests, but the context is clear.

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