getConsoleLogs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get browser console messages' and gives a purpose, but does not mention that the 'clear' parameter can delete messages after reading, nor does it describe any return format or side effects. The description is insufficient for an unannotated 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 two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler: 'Get browser console messages. For debugging JS errors and tracking behavior.' Every word serves a purpose.

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?

With no output schema, the description should clarify return values, but it does not. It also omits behavioral nuances such as the clearing side effect. For a simple tool with two optional parameters, the description is too sparse to be complete.

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%, with both parameters ('clear' and 'types') having descriptions. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb 'Get' and a clear resource 'browser console messages', followed by a stated purpose 'For debugging JS errors and tracking behavior.' This unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools like listNetworkRequests or listTabs.

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 a clear usage context: 'For debugging JS errors and tracking behavior.' This tells the agent when to use the tool, though it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions relative to other debugging tools.

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