read_chatgpt

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations: Chrome starts automatically, a saved login is used, timeout has a 0–840 second range, and timeout 0 produces a snapshot after loading. This aligns with readOnlyHint and destructiveHint and provides concrete operational expectations.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence. The second sentence adds essential behavioral details without unnecessary filler.

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 read-only tool with two parameters, the description is largely complete: it explains side effects, timeout behavior, and the fact that no message is sent. It could more explicitly describe what session_id should contain or how it relates to prior chats, but the overall picture is sufficient.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for parameter documentation. It explains timeout semantics well, including range and special value 0, but the required session_id is left mostly to inference from 'previous chat' and the property name.

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's function: restoring and reading a previous chat without sending a message. This distinguishes it from the sibling ask_chatgpt by explicitly noting that no message is sent.

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 phrase 'without sending a message' provides clear context for when to use this tool rather than ask_chatgpt. However, it does not explicitly name the alternative or state when to choose ask_chatgpt instead.

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