fast_browser_errors

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

Annotations are absent, so description must carry behavioral disclosure. It only says 'collect and store' without revealing side effects (e.g., whether it appends or replaces, if it clears previous errors, or if it requires an active session). Leaves critical behavioral traits unaddressed.

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?

Description is very short, but lacks structure such as examples, usage notes, or multiple sentences. It is minimal but not optimally informative. Every sentence should earn its place; here, one sentence attempts too much.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should compensate by explaining what the stored error summary contains, how it can be retrieved, or the lifecycle of the summary. It does not, leaving significant gaps.

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 0% and description provides no details about the required sessionId parameter. The agent gets no guidance on what sessionId represents or how to obtain it.

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?

Description states it collects console and network failures and stores an error summary. This clearly indicates the tool's function but does not distinguish it from sibling tools that also deal with browser state, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

No mention of when to use this tool over siblings like fast_browser_state or fast_browser_snapshot. Lacks context on prerequisites or scenarios.

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