dialog_auto

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains what happens when enabled (auto-accept/dismiss), the meaning of the 'accept' parameter, and auto-disable behavior. It could mention potential side effects or state persistence, but it is adequate for a toggle 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?

The description is concise (three sentences), front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds value. No redundant or vague language.

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's simplicity, the description is complete. It covers behavior, parameter roles, usage context, and sibling differentiation. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values.

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 must elaborate on parameters. It explains 'enabled' and 'accept' clearly, but misses 'tab_id'. While optional and default null, the lack of explanation for 'tab_id' leaves a gap, especially for agents unaware of tab-scoping.

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 explicitly states the tool's purpose: 'Enable or disable automatic handling of alert/confirm/prompt dialogs.' It uses a specific verb-resource combination and distinguishes itself from the sibling 'dialog_handle' by mentioning that disabling auto mode allows manual inspection.

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 clear when-to-use guidance: 'When enabled, all future dialogs are automatically accepted or dismissed... Disable with enabled=false when you need to inspect dialog content with dialog_handle.' It also notes auto-disable on browser disconnect.

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