browser_resize_window

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explicitly states the action is mutating and user-visible (resizes the real window) and recommends restoration. This is sufficient disclosure beyond the basic mutation hint.

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 very concise: two sentences front-load the purpose and provide usage guidance without any redundant or filler content. Every sentence adds value.

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 low complexity (3 simple parameters, no output schema), the description covers purpose, usage, and behavioral traits completely. An agent has enough information to select and 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 coverage is 100%, so the description adds minimal extra meaning beyond parameter names and types. It notes that tabId should come from browser_tabs_list or browser_tab_create, which provides usage context but doesn't significantly enhance understanding of the parameters.

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 resizes the browser window to given CSS pixel dimensions. It distinguishes from sibling tools, which handle gifs, page reading, finding, uploading, and network requests, none of which involve window resizing.

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 advises using the tool for reproducing responsive layouts or framing a recording, and suggests restoring the original size afterward. While it does not explicitly list when not to use, the use cases are well-defined and the alternatives are clear from the sibling tools list.

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