browserless_profiles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's safety profile is consistent. The description adds valuable behavioral context: profiles are saved logged-in states (cookies+storage) and can be replayed, and the return includes name, cookie/origin counts, and last-used time. No contradictions with annotations.

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 three sentences, front-loading the main purpose immediately. Every sentence serves a purpose: stating the action, defining what a profile is and its usage, and noting return fields. No wasted words.

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 there is no output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned (profile name, cookie/origin counts, last-used time). It also explains the concept of profiles and how they relate to other tools. For a list tool with pagination parameters, this is sufficiently complete.

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 100% (all three parameters have descriptions). The tool description adds no information about parameters beyond what the schema provides. Per the rubric, when coverage is high, a score of 3 is the baseline. No additional value from the description.

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 lists authentication profiles for the current token, specifying the verb 'list', the exact resource, and the scope. It distinguishes itself by explaining what a profile is (saved browser state) and that profiles are reusable by name in other tools, differentiating it from sibling tools that perform actions like crawling or searching.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'Call this before a task that needs the browser to start signed in, to discover which profiles already exist and pick one by name.' It provides clear context but does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternative tools; however, no sibling tool serves a similar purpose, so the guidance is sufficient.

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