live_browser_search

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It fails to mention whether the tool is read-only, has side effects, requires specific permissions, or how 'bounded' impacts behavior. The return type (ids) is stated, but no details on limits or error conditions.

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 brief (one sentence) and front-loaded, but it omits important context. It is concise but sacrifices completeness. Slightly more detail on 'bounded' and return format would improve it without adding bulk.

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 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It fails to explain the purpose of key parameters, how results are structured, or error handling. A more complete description would mention search scope, filtering, and result format.

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 schema covers 60% of parameters with descriptions, but the tool description adds no additional meaning. It does not explain any parameters or their semantics beyond what the schema provides. Parameters like 'loadable_only' and 'include_folders' remain unclear.

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 performs a 'bounded app.browser search' and returns 'BrowserItem ids', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like live_browser_load or live_browser_preview. The verb 'search' and resource 'browser' are specific. However, the term 'bounded' is vague and could be clarified.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as live_browser_roots or live_browser_capabilities. It does not specify prerequisites or contexts where this search is appropriate.

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