browser_reload

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

Annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and not destructive. The description adds useful context by explaining the CDP mechanism for ignore_cache and the lease_id requirement. However, it does not disclose potential side effects like page state reset or network implications beyond the cache, so it is adequate but not exceptional.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary action, and every clause serves a purpose. It explains the key parameter and a prerequisite without any fluff, making it highly efficient.

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?

For a simple reload tool, the description covers the main action and an important parameter, but it omits semantics for timeout_ms and does not mention what the return value or output schema contains. Given the tool's simplicity, this is an average level of completeness; more detail on timeout_ms would push it higher.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explicitly explains ignore_cache and notes that lease_id is required, but timeout_ms is completely ignored. With three parameters, leaving one entirely unexplained is a notable gap, though the other two are handled.

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 the specific verb 'Reload' and identifies the resource as 'the current page', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like browser_open and browser_action by focusing solely on reloading the page.

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 clearly states the action and offers guidance on using ignore_cache for a hard reload. It does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives, but the use case is inherently clear for a reload operation, so it earns a strong score despite lacking explicit exclusions.

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