Manage tabs

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, so the agent knows closing tabs is destructive. However, the description adds no further behavioral context: no mention of what happens when creating a tab (e.g., focus changes), whether selecting a tab is safe, or any side effects. With annotations present, the description's minimal contribution earns a low score.

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 a single sentence of 9 words, efficiently listing the four actions. It is front-loaded and has no filler. However, it could be slightly more structured (e.g., grouping actions with their required parameters) without losing conciseness.

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 tool has 4 parameters, 1 required, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions in the schema, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain how to use each action, what parameters are needed, what the return value looks like (e.g., list returns tabs?), or any interaction patterns. The agent would lack essential information to invoke the tool correctly.

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 0%, so the description bears full responsibility for explaining parameters. It only lists the action enum values (list, new, close, select) but does not explain required parameters for each action (e.g., url for new, index for close/select, _meta). This provides minimal value beyond the schema itself.

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 states the tool manages browser tabs with four specific actions: list, create, close, or select. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like browser_navigate or browser_click, which do not involve tab management. The verb+resource (manage tabs) is specific and actionable.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. For example, when to use browser_tabs with 'close' vs browser_close, or when to use 'select' vs browser_navigate. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or contextual hints to help the agent decide.

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