neuron_run_sequence

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It reveals that actions run in sequence but says nothing about failure behavior, side effects of click/type/navigate, tab/auth requirements, or result/return behavior—important context for a mutating browser automation tool.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and no filler. Listing the five actions in parentheses is compact and useful.

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?

Despite tool complexity and absence of an output schema or annotations, the description omits key operational details: step failure handling, how long a sequence can be (only in schema), what the tool returns, and how step fields map to actions. It is not complete enough for an agent to anticipate side effects or interpret results.

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 descriptions already cover 100% of top-level parameters ('Sequence steps (max 50)', 'Chrome tab ID', 'Delay between steps in ms'), so the baseline is 3. The description merely restates the action enum values and adds no meaning about how selectors, texts, value, expression, or waitMs should be used within steps.

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 uses a specific verb ('execute') and resource ('sequence of browser actions'), and names the five supported actions, which clearly distinguishes it from single-action siblings like neuron_click, neuron_type, and neuron_navigate. An agent can understand the tool's core function immediately.

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 implies use when multiple browser actions need to be run in sequence, but it never explicitly says when to choose this over chaining single-action tools or how it compares to recipe/replay alternatives. No exclusions or fallback guidance are provided, so this is only implied.

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