get_browser_content

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It accurately describes the read-only nature (getting information) and lists supported browsers. It does not mention error handling or potential permissions, but for a non-destructive retrieval, the description is reasonably transparent.

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 with no extraneous words. It front-loads the purpose and key details, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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, two-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, when to use it, supported browsers, and differentiation from a sibling. It does not detail the return structure or error cases, but the tool's simplicity makes this acceptable.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about what is returned (active tab title and URL per window, optionally all tabs) but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond the schema's parameter descriptions, which already include defaults and enum values.

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 retrieves detailed browser information (active tab title and URL for each window, optionally all tabs). It explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool get_desktop_state, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 this tool when comprehensive browser state is needed beyond get_desktop_state, providing context for when to use it. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or what get_desktop_state specifically covers, which could be clearer.

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